Project MUSE - Predatory Journals on Trial: Allegations, Responses, and Lessons for Scholarly Publishing from <i>FTC v. OMICS</i>

peter.suber's bookmarks 2019-05-01

Summary:

Abstract:  On 25 August 2016, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sued OMICS Group Inc., iMedPub LLC, Conference Series LLC, and Srinubabu Gedela, all affiliated with open access mega-publisher OMICS International, for deception in their solicitation of journal articles and advertising of conferences. The ongoing lawsuit seeks to stop OMICS's deceptive practices and disgorge US $50.5 million in ill-gotten gains. OMICS has in turn claimed over $2.1 billion for harm caused by the lawsuit to its business and employees. This article describes the main arguments, counter-arguments, and court decisions in the 5920 pages of pleadings, exhibits, and orders that have been filed through 14 October 2018. The article then evaluates the case to formulate key take-aways for publishers, editors, academics, and universities. Depending on its ultimate outcome, the case against OMICS may be a turning point in the practices of questionable open access online publishers, making this interim case assessment pertinent to all concerned about the future of academic publishing.

Link:

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/722819

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags:

oa.new oa.usa oa.usa.ftc oa.litigation oa.omics oa.predatory oa.misconduct oa.journals

Date tagged:

05/01/2019, 16:04

Date published:

05/01/2019, 12:04