28 Responses to Large New OA Publisher Launches with 85 Journals

  1. Daniel Corcos says:

    You do not make good research before commenting. In the contact us page, it is mentioned “10 Cheswold Blvd., #1D, Newark, De, 19713, United States”. In Google map, this address is available.

    The open access journals charge publication fee. To receive fee, the bank account is needed for any publisher. The bank will open an account only after address verification physically. Moreover, when a customer of a bank receives money from other countries, there are certain Forex procedures to be followed by banks in all countries. The publisher can’t simply cheat banks. Do you think the bank will not make address verification? If so, tell me which bank so that we can inform the relevant Government.

    Look at the below webpage”


    David Rain is Director, Environmental Studies Program; Associate Professor Geography and International Affairs

    I do not know whether this David Rain is associated with this new publisher. But you can’t say that David Rain is a fake name.

    You are misleading the readers of your blog. You do not allow any new publisher to grow. I think your judgments are absolutely biased.

    The moment a new publisher starts the business like this new publisher, you immediately stamp as predatory even before publishing single article. If every author believes you, no one will submit article to these new publishers. You try to kill all new publishers at infancy stage of their business.

    If somebody says against your comment, you immediately say in your blog “you go and publish with this new publisher and they also will be happy to publish your work”. This is not correct way for you to defend. At the same time, I am not recommending everyone this publisher. Allow the publisher to publish at least some articles. Assess the publisher based on the quality of articles. You can download some of the articles and send the articles to some academicians of the relevant field and publish those experts comments. When you evaluate the articles, there must be transparency. If you simply say that it was evaluated by some (undisclosed) experts, then how can you say those publishers are not transparent in their peer review or in their editorial operations?

    When I visited some of the publishers listed on your so-called predatory publishers list and their articles, the quality of articles of some publishers are really good. Ultimately, if the publisher is predatory, the quality of articles will be poor. So one must stamp a publisher purely based on quality of articles.

    You always judge based on some spam emails. Hindawi used and still uses spam. Versita Open still uses spam. Why these two have been removed in your list recently?

    There are several very low quality articles in Hindawi (I checked analytical chemistry area articles). You ask some analytical chemistry researchers whether any analytical chemistry article of Hindawi can ever get published in Analytical Chemistry journal of ACS.

    What happens at BMC Head and Neck Oncology journal? Why the journal has been closed In June 2012? After June 2012, did you ever contact BMC to know the reason in the past 5 months? Is it not part of your research? Have they not established a good system even though BMC is in open access publishing business for last 12 years? Are their policies so week? Can any single / multiple editors of BMC tamper with the corporate policy / business processes of BMC?

    When the organisation Dell was started, do you know what the investment size was and how Dell was competing with giants like IBM? Do you know where Dell assembled his initial computers? I know that all cannot become Michael Dell. But we should allow entrepreneurs to develop and encourage good business competition. We should not kill small and new businesses. We should guide them in a more constructive way to do the business in more ethical way. This will be our true contribution if we are really willing to encourage open access.

    • That address did not appear on the webpage when I researched my blog post. In any event, it’s a small apartment. Do you really think that 85 journals can be published successfully out of an apartment? You also didn’t understand what I said by fake name. It is not the name of the person who actually wrote the spam email — it’s a fake name for that person. Yes, of course, there will be really people with that name, but they have nothing to do with this corrupt operation.

      What publisher are you associated with?

      I judge publishers, not articles. It’s not uncommon for very fine articles to appear in predatory journals. This occurs because the predatory publishers trick honest researchers into submitting their work so they can get the author fee.

      I think you are in a state of denial. There are many corrupt publishers appearing every day. The word is out — you can make easy money bu starting up a scholarly publishing website. This is another example, and a particularly malevolent one.

      I don’t understand your questions about BMC; they make no sense.

  2. Daniel Corcos says:

    Definitely I am not in a denial mode. I want to be more constructive for your blog.

    Even if it is an apartment, 85 journals can be managed if all the editorial operations are handled online by each editors-in-chief. Editor-in-Chiefs can assign manuscripts for peer review to various reviewers online itself from each editors-in-chief’s university or house. The copyediting and proofreading can be outsourced completely. Most of the operations of Dell even today are outsourced and they do not have much in-house operations though the final product is physical computer. When you place an order with Dell, all the suppliers are notified on the new order and the assembling and shipping processes start. When a computer can be supplied by Dell with more of outsourcing, why can’t an electronic product “scholarly article” be published by outsourcing? With a well managed software, one can definitely manage 85 journals even within an apartment.

    If the address did not appear when you visited the webpage, why didn’t you attempt to send an email to the publisher? There are email ids given there. If I maintain a blog like you for the public, I would be more careful before publishing my comments and I would have asked the publisher for the address.

    You are just commenting on website links, title of the journal, images used on the website, country of editorial board members etc. You make some fun out of them. The whole problem is that you judge the publisher without judging the articles. A fake publisher cannot attract good articles continuously. So if frequent assessment on quality of articles is done, I am sure that a fake publisher can be caught. A subject expert can judge whether peer review is done or not by reading the published article. Why don’t you ask for peer review reports from the publisher if you have doubt on the peer review for a specific article?

    A publisher is predatory only if the articles are published without peer review just for the sake of author fee. This is what our major concern. If we can ensure / force the publisher to do the peer review, we can force the publisher to be ethical. The unethical publishers will not emerge. You can suggest new ways / policy / system to ensure peer review process in place for open access articles.

    By just keep on listing new publishers on your list every day, I am sure that the list will be keep growing in near future also. But it will not solve the problem associated with the open access publishing in the peer review process.

    I think we should spend our energy, expertise, knowledge, intelligence, our scholarly network to discuss (brainstorm) to come out with ideas for ensuring peer review for open access articles.

    For example, can the peer review reports be made available publicly (with or without referee names?) Should the peer review reports be made available upon written request (if so, written request by whom). Let us think in more progressing way.

    In your list of predatory publishers, can you come out for how many publishers you found that they publish without peer review?

    • Well, I disagree with pretty much everything you said. Your criteria for determining predatory publishers is simplistic and naive. Are you associated with a particular publisher? If so, which one? If you’re happy with a publisher operating 85 journals out of a cheap apartment near Interstate-95, then that’s fine — it reveals a lot. Your comparisons to Dell are specious — it’s a completely different industry. And there are many small companies that start out with bad intentions too. Also, I did email the publisher but got no response, so stop making stuff up. I stand by my analysis of this company. I recommend against having any professional contact with them.

  3. Dodson says:

    I agree with Daniel Corcos. We should think to solve the problem with OA scholarly publication.

  4. R V Krishnakumar says:

    Shooting spam e-mails indiscriminately is no way a good beginning. I think it should be enough to brand an OA publisher ‘predatory’ on just one account – ‘throw the net and catch as much as you can’ approach. Journals are built, not merely started. I think, none is empowered to act against predatory OA journals, as of now. Now one can only spot them. These publishers should ensure constitution of a robust editorial board for each journal. For 85 journals, I think, a publisher needs to identify at least 85 scholars. Given the variety of journals in this case, I think SciEP should have a ‘spotless’ list of about 500 scholars in total who have genuinely agreed to be a part of the evaluation process. If SciEP has done it, well, it has begun well. Has SciEP done it? Also, inviting articles from this list of scholars and throguh their contacts would be a good beginning. Such articles may also attract citations and help the journal grow. Publishers provide only the administrative framework and they need academicians’ support to complete the system. In what Dr.Beall lists in this forum, I see neither. Am I right? I believe there is no need to sympathise with such publishers who fail to do initial preparatory work. I would also say these publishers, in a way, have no regard for either the concept of publishing or the philosophy of science.

  5. Schmuck says:

    Come on 85 Journals and they are planning for conference also, which will cost you more than 1500$ for 2 days. If that does not make think twice or 1000 time before defending them, I have no idea what would

  6. Maruf Khan says:

    Thank you for the great post. I also got an email from “David Rain” and started browsing their website. Some things just didn’t look right. None of their publications had ISSNs, no editorial boards, no names of editors, editor in chiefs… This is definitely some smart scammer trying to make some extra bucks. There should be more expose like yours, so people don’t actually fall victim to these criminals.

  7. Sonali says:

    I just want to share my experience of web publication: in 2012, my research article was published in Journal of Advances in Developmental Research’ , recently one of the interviewer brought to my notice that this journal is no more publishing, the journal site appeared to be closed and I was shocked and felt very awkward. Can anybody tell me was that a fake publication? Shall I re-publish my valuable research?

  8. Yurii says:

    Yep, got the spam e-mail from them too. Funny how they can’t do even this right. They addressed it to me but sent it to a colleague of mine.
    You want to know how to build a journal? I suggest checking eLife, published by HHMI. They start building in almost two years before the first issues. So, yes, if you start by dumping out 85 journals with no editorial boards and want me to believe that you are a real “new” publisher, then I have a nice beach in Arizona especially for you :)

  9. Nazri says:

    Thanks for the valuable info. Received their spam email today and immediately tried to look up the publisher, which led me to this page.

  10. thegameiam says:

    Thank you for doing the legwork. I got the spam today, and the sciepub site is giving a 502 error.

  11. Ty Webster says:

    The address, 10 Cheswold Blvd., #1D, Newark, De, is real, but is a residential apartment in a multi-tenant apartment building in the Harbor Club Apartments. Based on my research, it is/was leased to Melanie Gaglio, a Registered Agent. The address is, effectively, a false front. Ms. Gaglio, by my count, is a Registered Agent for at least two dozen, and presumably many more, businesses. Nothing illegal here, as her services as a Registered Agent appear to be required by the State of Delaware. Delaware seems to be a tax haven of sorts and is otherwise very business-friendly.

    Every corporation in DE is required to have a Registered Agent, for instance, to receive and forward legal and other documents on its behalf. Registered Agents can, for instance, receive and deposit checks for their corporate clients who are often international startup companies based elsewhere but want to give the appearance they are based in the U.S. by using the Delaware address of their Registered Agent as their fake corporate address. There appears to be practically no standards or training for Registered Agents, and that all they do is collect a fee for their services.

  12. The LinkedIn page for sciepub says “Education: Ebonyi State University”, which is in Nigeria: http://www.linkedin.com/in/sciepub

  13. Peter S. says:

    I just got an email from these people:

    We’ve finished reading the abstract of your paper [title redacted of one of my papers already published in a highly prestigious journal] and will recommend it to our editors. If you are interested in our journals and want to publish it on our journals, please extend this paper and send it to us by our online submission system. All manuscripts submitted will be considered for publication.

    My guess is that they are desperate for content, and are trying to have authors “extend” already-published papers and republish them. This seems like an incredibly bad idea, and likely to run afoul of copyright law.

  14. meenu says:

    i got a mail in the above said format too, and was surprised. Upon browsing, came to this website, and correlated well with my doubts. Well thanks for the info

  15. What do you say about following publishers ???
    (1) “Serial Publications” (serialsjournal.com)from India
    (2) “Accent Publications” from India
    Why you are not including ???
    Are you biased ????

    • I limit my work to open-access journals and publishers.
      Serial Publications is predominantly a subscription publisher. That is, it is not an open-access publisher, so it’s not eligible for my list. You’ll need to send a link for the second one; there are several publishers with that same name, so I need to know exactly which one you’re talking about.
      I try to be unbiased.

  16. What about International eJournals,
    Please give some information…

    • I had not heard of this publisher before.
      I have now analyzed it. I found it met the criteria, so I have added it to my list. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. I recommend that you not submit your work to either of its two journals.

  17. Sean says:

    I see Prof Y.N. Reddy is on the Editorial board of International eJournals!

  18. Sean says:

    Fascinating that both the editor-in-chief you mention and Prof Reddy are – or were – on the editorial board of the International Journal of Mathematics Computer Sciences and Information Technology (http://serialsjournals.com/editorial-board.php?journals_id=146) – a Serial Publication journal, this also having been one of the publishers suggested for investigation by Prof Reddy.

    I’d have thought most people linked to a publisher would be keen for that publisher not to come under Jeffrey’s scrutiny……

  19. Jake says:

    I got a cold invite to review for the American Journal of Applied Mathematics. My contact is from a faculty member at the University of Management and Technology in Lahore, as is one of the paper authors, and the paper is for a special issue of proceedings for a conference being held there. I’m not sure how they found me in particular: the paper’s in a field broadly similar to my own but hardly one I’m specifically relevant to.

    Actually, taking a look at the conference webpage (it’s UNCPAM 2015, for what it’s worth), the overwhelming majority of participants are from institutions in Lahore, mostly the host institution, which makes me wonder why they’re going outside their own community for review.

  20. Johannes Li says:

    If anyone doesn’t think this is a predatory publisher, please look at this journal of this publisher:


    Six article were published in this issue. Coauthors U. V. S. Seshavatharam and S. Lakshminarayana published 5 articles in the same issue of the journal. Only 1 article was by other authors.

    By the way, many journals of this publisher are “ISSN pending”.

    Have a look, enjoy, and have fun!

  21. […] the title in the search box with ” so it would look for the whole term. This gave two hits. One post is from end 2012 and clearly is about the publisher in question (SCIEP), another strangely enough […]

  22. herr doktor bimler says:

    In a late update to this story, I received my SciEP spam today, nominally from a “Dr. MD. Miller (Editorial Assistant, Science and Education Publishing)”.
    In a display of their competence and nous, the links within the e-mail were malformed and did not work… but they all pointed to a website “http://news.oaarticles.com”. As for the source of the spam, “Dr Miller” uses the site “scisholar.com” for his e-mail server.

    So “oaarticles.com” turns out to be registered in the name of stevencoughlins@gmail.com

    “scisholar.com” is also registered with that e-address. Whoisology goes further, providing the information that the site resides in Shenzhen, China:

    … so the answer to your question, “Who is behind this mockademic fleet?” is “A prolific and energetic fraudster in China”.

Leave a Reply -- All comments are subject to moderation, including removal.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,274 other followers

%d bloggers like this: