{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022155085599194362, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0030211480362537764, 'mean_word_length': 5.371794871794871, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Goods-Dominant—Service-Dominant Perspective on Counterfeiting

Extant research is equivocal on the positive and negative implications of counterfeits and is unable to offer an explanation for why purchase and use of counterfeits evoke mixed and contentious responses. We argue that the unreconciled claims about counterfeits are partially rooted in the divided logics of value, as articulated by the goods-dominant logic (GDL) versus service-dominant logic (SDL). We develop a conceptual understanding of non-deceptive counterfeits (NDCs) atop SDL axioms, along key extant research debates. Our examination of the theoretical GDL-SDL views of NDCs with a synthesis of 132 extant academic works, informs the adversarial orientation towards such products. We address extant debates using a content analysis of studies on NDCs. We offer propositions that link the theoretical relevance of evaluating outcomes of NDCs from an SDL perspective and provide foci for future research on this subject.