Academic Publishers Sued: Class Action Alleges Exploitation of Scholars

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit has been filed against several major academic publishers, alleging that they exploit scholars by forcing them to provide unpaid peer review services and by engaging in price-fixing.

Consumers Affected: Scholars who have contributed to academic journals published by the defendants.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

A neuroscience scholar from UCLA is suing six of the largest for-profit publishers of peer-reviewed journals, accusing them of colluding to exploit scholars’ labor and divert billions in funding from scientific research. 

The publishers—Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer, Wiley, Sage, Taylor & Francis, and Springer Nature—are alleged to have created a scheme that violates the Sherman Act by fixing the price of peer review services, reducing competition, and monopolizing intellectual property, according to the lawsuit.

Scholars Forced To Provide Free Labor For Publishers' Profits, Lawsuit Claims

Dr. Lucina Uddin, who filed the proposed class action lawsuit, has published over 175 academic articles and is an expert in her field, according to the lawsuit. She has had previous appointments at institutions like Stanford University and NYU. She has also provided unpaid peer review services for more than 150 journals, the lawsuit alleges. 

In her lawsuit, Uddin describes how she and other scholars are coerced into providing their labor for free under a system that offers no compensation but threatens their careers if they refuse. Peer review—critical to academic publishing—has long been performed by scholars like Uddin without payment, while publishers profit from selling access to their work.

Publishers Accused Of Unfair Practices That Hinder Scientific Progress

The lawsuit claims the publishers have conspired to maintain three unfair rules: the "Unpaid Peer Review Rule," the "Single Submission Rule," and the "Gag Rule." Scholars are forced to submit to only one journal at a time, significantly reducing competition among publishers and stalling the publication process. 

While manuscripts are under review, the publishers effectively claim ownership of the research, stopping authors from sharing their findings. Once a manuscript is accepted, scholars often sign away their intellectual property rights, while the publishers charge institutions exorbitant fees for access, the lawsuit alleges. 

These practices allow the publishers to maintain profit margins as high as 38%—surpassing even tech giants like Apple and Google, according to the lawsuit.

In 2023, Elsevier generated $3.8 billion in revenue from its journals, while Taylor & Francis made $739 million. Together, the defendants raked in over $10 billion from their peer-reviewed journals, profits sustained through what Uddin describes as unlawful collusion that siphons taxpayer money away from science. “These astounding revenues and profits margins are sustained through collusion, and unlawfully divert billions of taxpayer dollars every year from science to the Publisher Defendants,” she argues. 

Academic Community Voices Opposition To Publishers' Profit-Driven Model

The academic community has long voiced opposition to the publishers' practices, accusing them of exploiting scholars for profit, Uddin says in the lawsuit. Over 20,000 researchers have publicly condemned Elsevier and other companies for their reliance on unpaid labor. A 2004 parliamentary report criticized the industry, while Deutsche Bank has called the process a “bizarre triple-pay system,” where the state funds research, pays scholars to review it, and then buys the journals containing the reviewed work.

These practices are not just about profit—they have far-reaching implications, Uddin argues. The delays caused by the slow publication process hamper scientific progress in fields like cancer research, material science, and climate change solutions.

Antitrust Lawsuits Target Companies Across Various Industries

Uddin’s lawsuit is not the only recent high-profile antitrust case. In the tech industry, a class action lawsuit against Valve Corporation alleges the company inflated game prices on its Steam platform by preventing publishers from offering lower prices elsewhere. Meanwhile, a $284 million settlement was reached with ten elite U.S. colleges for allegedly colluding to reduce financial aid for students.

Live Nation and Ticketmaster also continue to face allegations of using their dominance to inflate ticket prices, resulting in a class action lawsuit from concertgoers. In a more recent case, NFL Sunday Ticket subscribers saw their antitrust claims dismissed by a federal judge, signaling the challenges consumers face in proving harm in such cases.

Uddin wants to represent contributors to academic journals from across the country in her lawsuit. She is suing for alleged violations of the Sherman Act and is seeking injunctive relief, damages, fees, costs, and interest.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Uddin v. Elsevier, B.V., et al.
• Case Number: 1:24-Cv-06409 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Dean M. Harvey,Jallé H. Dafa, and Benjamin A. Trouvais (Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP)

Have you experienced the frustrations of the academic publishing industry? Share your thoughts and experiences in the comments below.