The Federal Trade Commission won an initial ruling against the India-based publisher for allegedly misleading researchers and for misrepresenting journal impact factors and editorial boards. 

The authors of two new studies on the payments suggest stricter guidelines are needed.

New papers from a cancer journal once named as a possibly predatory publication will no longer appear in the widely used research database.

The publisher will ask its journal editors to adopt widely accepted standards on transparency and openness in scientific communication.

As article processing charges top $5,000 at some research journals, authors and institutions have means of negotiating better deals or finding less expensive options.

Although the popular blacklist of predatory publishers is gone, the suspect journals they produce are not. 

These institutions join around 60 others that hope to put increasing pressure on the publishing giant in ongoing negotiations for a new nationwide licensing agreement.

Thousands of open access papers have mistakenly asked readers to pay access fees, but publishers are correcting the errors. 

We suggest a centralized facility for submitting to journals—one that would benefit scientists and not only publishers.

Our totally bogus case report swiftly passed muster, with only minor revisions requested.