From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:50:03 +0100

Hi David

I think the argument might run. I am surer you are familiar with it
from your past:

Research outputs are published in journals. Research outputs are very
important to the general public because they provide peer reviewed
information.

Elsevier publish a lot of journals. Many of them are dependent on the
subscription model. If there is no need to subscribe to any journals
because you can get the articles on a pirate site the journals will
collapse because no-one will subscribe and it costs money to run them.

Now I appreciate that this is only one way of looking at an issue like
this but this is a court case and that is what lawyers do.

Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 09:51:40 +0000

Reading the Nature article I see:

"The defendants’ “unlawful activities have caused and will continue to
cause irreparable injury to Elsevier, its customers and the public,”
Elsevier’s New York-based attorneys, DeVore & DeMarco, told the court."

I can understand how one might make a case for harm to the publisher
(although proving it might be tricky) - but I’m struggling to think
what the case might be for harm to customers and the public. Am I
missing something obvious?

David