Academic publishers face class action over ‘peer review’ pay, other restrictions
By Mike Scarcella
Sept 13 (Reuters) -A University of California Los Angeles neuroscience professor has sued six major academic journal publishers, claiming in a proposed class action that they violated antitrust law by barring simultaneous submissions to multiple journals and denying pay for “peer review” services.
Professor Lucina Uddin filed the lawsuit in Brooklyn federal court on Thursday against Elsevier, John Wiley & Sons, Sage Publications, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis and Wolters Kluwer.
Scholarly journal submissions are reviewed by other experts in the author's field to vet their submissions for publication and comment on their findings. Uddin said that the practice of not paying scholars for peer reviews amounted to unlawful price-fixing.
The lawsuit also said the publishers unlawfully agreed not to compete with each other for manuscripts, reducing any incentive to review and publish work more quickly.
Wiley in a statement said the claims "are without merit." Wolters Kluwer, Elsevier and the other defendants declined to comment or did not immediately respond to a request for one.
Dean Harvey, a lawyer for Uddin, said in a statement that the for-profit academic publishing industry had earned billions "exploiting the goodwill and hard work of brilliant scholars, and of taxpayers who foot the bill to create their product.”
The lawsuit said the publishing defendants in 2023 collectively received more than $10 billion in revenue from their peer-reviewed journals.
Uddin has been a professor in UCLA’s psychology department since July 2023. Her complaint said she has published more than 175 academic articles and provided peer review services for more than 150 journals.
The lawsuit seeks class-action status for an estimated “hundreds of thousands” of class members.
"It has become increasingly difficult to coerce busy scholars into providing their valuable labor for nothing,” Uddin said, and manuscripts can sit awaiting peer review for months or years.
Her lawsuit also challenged what it called a “gag” rule that bars scholars from freely sharing scientific advancements in their manuscripts while they are under peer review.
Scholars often must sign away intellectual property rights to their work in exchange for nothing, the lawsuit said, while the publishers charge “the maximum the market will bear for access to that scientific knowledge.”
The case is Dr. Lucina Uddin v. Elsevier BV et al, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, No. 1:24-cv-06409.
For plaintiffs: Dean Harvey of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, and Benjamin Elga of Justice Catalyst Law
For defendants: No appearances yet
免责声明: XM Group仅提供在线交易平台的执行服务和访问权限，并允许个人查看和/或使用网站或网站所提供的内容，但无意进行任何更改或扩展，也不会更改或扩展其服务和访问权限。所有访问和使用权限，将受下列条款与条例约束：(i) 条款与条例；(ii) 风险提示；以及(iii) 完整免责声明。请注意，网站所提供的所有讯息，仅限一般资讯用途。此外，XM所有在线交易平台的内容并不构成，也不能被用于任何未经授权的金融市场交易邀约和/或邀请。金融市场交易对于您的投资资本含有重大风险。
所有在线交易平台所发布的资料，仅适用于教育/资讯类用途，不包含也不应被视为用于金融、投资税或交易相关咨询和建议，或是交易价格纪录，或是任何金融商品或非应邀途径的金融相关优惠的交易邀约或邀请。
本网站上由XM和第三方供应商所提供的所有内容，包括意见、新闻、研究、分析、价格、其他资讯和第三方网站链接，皆保持不变，并作为一般市场评论所提供，而非投资性建议。所有在线交易平台所发布的资料，仅适用于教育/资讯类用途，不包含也不应被视为适用于金融、投资税或交易相关咨询和建议，或是交易价格纪录，或是任何金融商品或非应邀途径的金融相关优惠的交易邀约或邀请。请确保您已阅读并完全理解，XM非独立投资研究提示和风险提示相关资讯，更多详情请点击 这里。
