> these publishers actually provide real value ... If they didn't, it'd be pretty easy to destroy their grip over academia. Your argument equates to "they have

> these publishers actually provide real value ... If they didn't, it'd be pretty easy to destroy their grip over academia. Your argument equates to "they have maintained their grip, therefore they're providing real value". Their stranglehold seems to come primarily from academic incentives to publish in prestigious journals. > The idea that after 23 years of internet they've maintained their position via smart deals is ludicrous. Perhaps someone has claimed that, but I don't recall ever seeing that argument.