"I’d say that canceling all subscriptions to prevent further funding of predatory publishers would be a reasonable next step, now that we know how to identify them". The sound you hear is the sound of a mike being dropped on the floor. via .
How convenient! The definition of "predatory publisher" came with a handy cartoon!
“Elsevier now officially a ‘predatory’ publisher” - nails it
Elsevier now officially a "predatory" publisher vía
New definition! Elsevier now officially a "predatory" publisher.
Absolutely! And some of those publishers fit the published definition perfectly and don't even have to necessarily do what you described
A response from on news that a new definition of predatory publisher has been proposed.
self-interest at the expense of scholarship, false or misleading information, lack of transparency. At least for this 3 behaviours (not to include others less obvious) Elsevier may be considered "predatory", according with the new definition in Nature
Alternative facts. Just look at with whom they're in cahoots with: Evilsevier. Known, official predatory publisher
You will probably appreciate that the definition fits legacy publishers like, say Elsevier, to a T: I suspect that may even be intentional :-)
I took it to mean that all criteria need to be met for anything to be called "predatory". At least Elsevier does fit all five of them