"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
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
Alternative facts. Just look at with whom they're in cahoots with: Evilsevier. Known, official predatory publisher
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
There can be more than one indicator to look for when publishing in a journal. I do like deceptive publishing more. Otherwise there is a lot of truth in this post
A response from on news that a new definition of predatory publisher has been proposed.
You will probably appreciate that the definition fits legacy publishers like, say Elsevier, to a T: I suspect that may even be intentional :-)