They do get paid, just more indirectly in the form of grants. It may not be for "profit", but scientists don't work for free or publish purely out of altruism.

They do get paid, just more indirectly in the form of grants. It may not be for "profit", but scientists don't work for free or publish purely out of altruism. As for building for-profit services on top of not-for-profit research, I don't see the issue. Would it be equally immoral to sell or even lease Bibles to churches since churches are financially reliant on donations? The beauty of Capitalism is it tells you what people are willing to put money/time towards. If enough of the scientific community feels so strongly that academic research should be accessible for free via some sort of charity, they are welcome to start and manage said charity and/or refuse to buy subscriptions to Academia.edu. I honestly wish them luck, a free, open service for such knowledge would be awesome! However, proclaiming that others are morally obligated to provide that charity, simply because they market their service to "charities", sounds rather arrogant to me.