Um, you're talking about patenting the Higgs boson, the structure of DNA, the speed of light. There is academic merit in being a reviewer. Being a reviewer for

Um, you're talking about patenting the Higgs boson, the structure of DNA, the speed of light. There is academic merit in being a reviewer. Being a reviewer for the New England Journal of Medicine would surely favor any tenure committee or grant application. Perhaps one could argue that's hard to perceive, but I think it's safe to say any PhD sees the value. The journals, on the other hand, have abided by very loose business practices with exorbatant margins enabled to a great degree by the perception of the academic honor system, for a long time. Their business models and methods are thankfully coming under much deserved scrutiny. Should researchers be honorable people? Yes. Will you always find dishonorable behavior in a set of 100 people, over a lifetime? Yes.