What you're raising is extremely important. In this case it is a counterfeit and perhaps pirated good, to the extent that there is unauthorized use of a CSA logo and perhaps some copyright violation as well. So yes, it might be a counterfeit good. Where it becomes trickier is if, as you say, the consumer buys something in the discount store that would cost five times the price outside. Are they being defrauded? Do they actually know there's something wrong with that? Or, in normal stores, do they think they're buying the legitimate product and they are not?
To protect the consumer, we have to distinguish the circumstances of the purchase. What Ken is suggesting is that more and more we're blurring those two lines. The consumer is getting more and more confused. Perhaps there are also circumstances in those discount stores where there is no copyright or trademark infringement; there is no CSA label, and consumers know they're taking a risk. Those are more public safety and health issues than a counterfeit issue in the context of an intellectual property crime.
We are still trying to figure out where the trend is and how important the public and health issues are versus the counterfeit. It goes without saying that the counterfeiters, or those who replicate in an unauthorized manner, will go where the money is. If people know that using the CSA logo will increase their sales, they will use it; hence, they will become counterfeiters.
The situation is more complicated on the ground than one is led to believe by looking at IP laws versus public and health safety issues.