…including Wiley, Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer,

…on behalf of a putative class or scientists and scholars who allege that these six world’s-largest for-profit publishers of peer-reviewed scholarly journals conspired to unlawfully appropriate billions of dollars that would otherwise have funded scientific research.

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 Defendants select manuscripts for publication, the Publisher Defendants will often require scholars to sign away all intellectual property rights, in exchange for nothing. The manuscripts then become the actual property of the Publisher Defendants, and the Publisher Defendants charge the maximum the market will bear for access to that scientific knowledge.”

The philosopher who shared this, who has a friend at the law firm bringing the suit, tells me that they are interested in identifying more humanities scholars at plaintiffs.  (There is a form at the link, above, for submitting your name.)   Before signing up as plaintiffs, be sure to ask about what you will need to do; my guess is named plaintiffs will be deposed, and might end up testifying at a trial, if it gets to trial.  The first two claims strike me as the stronger ones, assuming proof of collusion can be adducted, but I'm not sure how strong; the third claim seems to me more dubious.  If any antitrust scholars are reading this, shoot me an email if you have a view about the allegations and their prospects.