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