https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu08.2020.204 Вестник СПбГУ. Менеджмент. 2020. Т. 19. Вып. 2 203 © Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет, 2020 МАРКЕТИНГ UDC: 339.138 JEL: М310 BRAND IMITATION IN THE MODERN SIMULACRUM MARKET VERSUS MARKETING ETHICS V. I. Cherenkov, S. A. Starov, I. V. Gladkikh St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation For citation: Cherenkov V. I., Starov S. A., Gladkikh I. V. 2020. Brand imitation in the modern simulacrum market versus marketing ethics. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management 19 (2): 203–226. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu08.2020.204 Te article presents some brand imitation issues considering the specifc features of the contemporary postmodern economy where tangible items (products) are factually replaced with their simulacra (brands). Te contradiction between the “spirit and letter” of the American Marketing Association Code of Ethics and the opportunities to violate its rules while branding is highlighted. It is shown that brands represented as simulacra open extensive opportunities for imitating brand leaders. A semantic ramifcation of terms “brand leader” and “brand imitator” in Anglophone Internet environments is represented. A typology of brand leader imitation methods with relevant examples and comments is given. Te concept of “consumer confusion” is clarifed and the factors determining the impact of imitated brand leaders on consumer behavior are systemized and analytically described. Te legal aspects of a brand imitation strategy (proactive and reactive options) are briefy discussed. Te article is supplied with relevant tables and pics. Keywords: brand imitator, brand leader, brand semantics, brand semiotics, consumer con- fusion, marketing ethics, postmodern economy, proactive brand protection, reactive brand protection, simulacrum market. INTRODUCTION Nearly three decades of the Russian market economy have drastically changed the consumer behavior of most Russians. When the authors were university students (and were even unaware about the term “brand”) only “Zhigulevskoe” (“Жигулевское”) and “Rizhskoe” (“Рижское”) names of beer were available. Nowadays, just a list of the available imported and domestic brands available in Russia would take up a page. We have italized the word domestic for a reason. For instance, “Baltica” (“Балтика”), a quite valuable brand (reportedly US $1.15 billion worth) has been owned by Carlsberg Group since 2012. And this brand represented in Cyrillic creates the phenomenon of consumer