The Case of the “Italian” Shoes
Eisenberg provides a great example of a communication issue between two types of organizations and their potential buyers. Both organizations have unethical practices to some degree, but the questions asked of the reader are more directed at communication techniques used by each of these companies, and how aspects like globalization effect the legality of the issue. On one hand, there is the large organization who uses deceptive marketing tactics, and the other is a street vendor that sells fraudulent “knockoff” versions of name brands.
Question One
The first question asks, “Do you see a difference between what these companies are doing and the illegal production of counterfeit products that are fraudulently stamped with a designer label and sold on street corners?” Definitely. The original designer companies are misleading customers by advertising their products as made in a more local European country rather than stating most of the materials and labor are outsourced from a more economical production solution in China. This is done to convey an image of quality and luxury to potential customers, because “created in a Chinese factory” doesn’t sound as appealing as “handcrafted in the foothills of the Italian Dolomites.” However, the counterfeit products that are sold on street corners are even more misleading, these street vendors claim to be selling the exact product that can be found in stores; when in reality it is a product created from materials of much lower quality. This is also trademark infringement and harmful to the brand image of the original company, not to mention it is an outright lie to customers.
The original designer companies and the street vendors are both misleading and dishonest to customers, but the designer companies are not completely false in their claim of production location. They have used