• pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    2 months ago

    As detailed in the complaint, the defendants’ alleged scheme has three main components. First, an agreement to fix the price of peer review services at zero that includes an agreement to coerce scholars into providing their labor for nothing by expressly linking their unpaid labor with their ability to get their manuscripts published in the defendants’ preeminent journals.

    Second, the publisher defendants agreed not to compete with each other for manuscripts by requiring scholars to submit their manuscripts to only one journal at a time, which substantially reduces competition by removing incentives to review manuscripts promptly and publish meritorious research quickly.

    Third, the publisher defendants agreed to prohibit scholars from freely sharing the scientific advancements described in submitted manuscripts while those manuscripts are under peer review, a process that often takes over a year. As the complaint notes, “From the moment scholars submit manuscripts for publication, the Publisher Defendants behave as though the scientific advancements set forth in the manuscripts are their property, to be shared only if the Publisher Defendant grants permission. Moreover, when the Publisher

    https://www.lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/academic-journals/

    • abbadon420@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I don’t care what they need, they can take it all as long as they win this. I am willing to sacrifice OP’s body

  • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Did they style their firm’s logo after those “look I’m a fan of a thing” t-shirts