<title>Progress in counterfeit deterrence: the contribution of information exchange</title>

Abstract

In this paper we will establish the need for communication between organisations involved in the fight against counterfeiting crime. We will also examine the paradox in providing information that could serve the criminal as well as those attempting to protect themselves from criminal activity.Counterfeiting is estimated to account for over 5% of world trade. It is a global operation with no respect for international borders. It is increasingly sophisticated and increasingly the province of organised crime, which applies the techniques developed for drug distribution to the production and distribution of counterfeit articles. To fight this crime there is an increasing plethora of authenticating features and technologies available. Many companies do not recognise the problem and the number of anticounterfeit technologies can be confusing for potential users. There is therefore a need for information about them, their comparative characteristics, to be easily available. At present there is inadequate communication between those who develop and produce anti-counterfeiting devices and those who use them, notwithstanding the marketing efforts of the former. Communication which stimulates and encourages the spread of information between those engaged in-the fight against counterfeit crime can only help in that fight.But what we term 'the communication paradox' requires circumspection and care in the content and the distribution of such information. The communication paradox is that the better the channels ofcominunication, the easier it isfor criminals to get hold ofthat information. The challenge is to institute communications which are effective but restrictive. More communication of information between those engaged in counterfeit deteffence will enhance individual companies' and organisations' anticounterfeit efforts and thus contribute to an overall improvement in the fight against counterfeit crime. INTRODUCTIONThis is a technical conference. Probably every paper following this one will present information of a technical or scientific nature about devices which use optical techniques to deter counterfeiters. This paper is the exception. It lays out the environment in which these developments are occurring. Why are so many people, so many organisations devoting resources to preventing counterfeits? The answer is obviously because criminals are producing counterfeits and they should be prevented from doing so.So the first part of this paper surveys the situation pertaining in the world of counterfeits. This may not be new information to some of you, but others may be surprised -perhaps alarmed -at the view presented. The second part of this paper examines the need to improve communication between those producing and developing counterfeit detenence devices and those that should be using them. Through better communication, deterring counterfeits can be more successfully achieved. THE IMPACT OF COUNTERFEITING CRIME.There are several adverse affects of counterfeiting:1. Economic costs, a direct result of counte...

Information hiding-a survey

“…The importance of these technologies is not limited to protecting currency and securities. Forgery of drugs, vehicle spares, computer software and other branded products is said to have cost over $24 billions in 1995, and to have directly caused over 100 deaths worldwide [95]. Security printing techniques are a significant control measure, although many fielded sealing products could be much better designed given basic attention to simple issues such as choice of pressure-sensitive adhesives and nonstandard materials [96].…”

Psychovisual approach to digital picture watermarking

“…This is a major issue since international organizations, such as the Mafia, organize financial flows on the use of counterfeit material. 2 Besides, digitization of pictures communication has provoked a parallel growth of technological tools for the creation and broadcasting of fakes. This is why the struggle against counterfeiting begs for ongoing development.…”