Exploitation in the Academic Publishing Industry: The Case of a Scholar Suing Major Publishers for Violating Antitrust Laws

Abstract

          This article examines the problem of exploitation in the international academic publishing industry, focusing on the practices of major publishers who impose high publication fees and subscription charges, thereby restricting access to scholarly knowledge. A key case study in this paper is Uddin v. Elsevier, B.V. et al., in which a scholar from the University of California filed a lawsuit against six leading publishers for violating antitrust laws. The central allegations incorporate the “Unpaid Peer Review Rule,” whereby reviewers receive no compensation; the “Single Submission Rule,” allowing only one submission at a time; and the “Gag Rule,” which prevents academic authors from sharing or disseminating their work before publication. Those giant publishers have been criticized for disproportionately benefiting from these practices, which may restrict competition. When considering a comparative aspect under Thailand’s Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017), such conduct may constitute cartel agreements that restrain competition under Section 54, which are deemed illegal per se. The outcome of this case holds important implications for reforming the global academic publishing industry and may lead to reducing the financial burden of publication on scholars in the future.