A few days ago, some scholars launched a boycott against the publisher Elsevier, believing that Elsevier is suspected of using its monopoly position to maliciously raise fees for online journals. So far, about 3,800 scholars and researchers have signed a petition on the website www.thecostofknowledge.com to support the boycott (picture below). The petition argued that Elsevier charges "exorbitant amounts" for its journals and uses bundled sales that "force libraries to subscribe to many titles they don't need." The petition also accuses Elsevier of supporting bills like SOPA, PIPA, and the Research Works Act that “restrict the free exchange of information.” Scholars who have signed and supported include major universities in the world, such as Oxford University, Harvard University, Cambridge University, McGill University, University College London, University College Dublin, etc. Tim Worstall, a researcher at the Adam Smith Institute in London, wrote a blog post on Forbes.com, hoping to bring about some important changes in Elsevier's journal publishing operations through petitions and his own blog comments. British mathematician Tim Gowers also publicly expressed his boycott: "Not only will I refuse to use Elsevier's journals, but I will also publicly state my attitude. I am not the first person to do this. , but as more people join in, society will value our opinions more." Gowers added: "We now have more bargaining power with publishers because their services are no longer available. This is our only choice... In short, if you continue to publish papers in Elsevier's journals, you are helping Elsevier to harm academic research institutions, so please don't do this. One last thing, Elsevier. "We are not the only publisher doing this, but it is the most problematic." Elsevier issued a statement saying that the facts described in the boycott petition were wrong. “The content Elsevier publishes is better than ever, and the average user cost is the lowest ever. In fact, (1) over the past decade, we have had the lowest price growth in the entire industry; and (2) We have provided a large number of price-splitting options on the basis of bundled subscriptions; (3) Elsevier is also the first and main sponsor (Pubmed central) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), We seek to work with the intellectual community to enhance the dissemination of scientific knowledge, and we are confident that we have done the best we can without government directives." The statement also said that Elsevier respects the freedom of the authors to make decisions and hopes that in the petition. Those who signed the book were able to review their positions and Elsevier was willing to discuss their concerns. Rick Anderson of the University of Utah believes that from a business perspective, Elsevier's approach is not out of the ordinary. The reason why it has become the target of criticism is more because of its status. "Elsevier" has become "a company that we love to hate." synonymous with "major scientific publisher".

Please accept it, thank you!