Academic vs. commercial publishing almost three hundred years ago.  The following is taken from a biography of Richard Bentley, arguably the greatest Latin scholar of modern times, and recounts how a public-spirited attempt to produce a new kind of scholarly publishing ran aground.  I draw no analogies and make no comment, though I wouldn't mind being called "a gentleman of letters and high life".

Jim O'Donnell

ASU

“In the year 1736, an association was established in London for the ' Encouragement of Learning,’ consisting of numerous personages distinguished for rank and genius; who subscribed to assist authors by publishing their works under the auspices and in part at the cost of the Society. It was an important object for this institution to start with eclat, by printing the work of some great author; and accordingly they offered to commence with the publication of Dr. Bentley's Manilius, which was known to be ready for the press. The Doctor, to their surprise and mortification, instead of gratefully accepting the proffered honour, started certain objections to the tendency of such a society, which had never occurred to its liberal supporters, and condemned with great freedom the whole undertaking. Piqued at this unexpected rejection of their offer, they addressed a similar proposal to Bentley's old enemy, Conyers Middleton, who was at that time engaged upon his Life of Cicero, which they solicited his permission to publish. He however preferred the more lucrative method of printing by subscription : and the Society were obliged to content themselves with authors of less celebrity.

“The experience however of a few years proved the justice of Bentley's exceptions : the design of the Society, liberal and spirited as it undoubtedly was, could not be executed without interfering with the interests of the book-sellers, who are in reality the most efficient patrons of literature: it became therefore the policy of that whole fraternity to oppose the success of their general rival. In a short time, it was found necessary to take in the cooperation of some book-sellers, as partners:  but even then the liberality of the Society to its authors left for the traders such small profits, that they felt no interest in the circulation of its books: and after twelve years' perseverance, it was found that the whole funds of the Society, consisting of about £2000, had been expended, without any effectual advance towards compassing its public-spirited objects.”

From a footnote to this account, one of the supporters of the project wrote to a friend thus: “You have no doubt heard in what a discouraging way Dr. Bentley has used our Society: for tho' his work of Manilius was ready to be printed, and be desired by several people to have it published by the Society, he not only raised such ill-grounded objections against the institution itself, but chose to throw it into the hands of a common bookseller, rather than into those of the Society; which has not only made several gentlemen of letters and high life exclaim against the discouraging and ungenerous act, but will be recorded in the learned world, perhaps, when he is dead and rotten. Such men deserve fleecing from booksellers; and I am mistaken if he or his editors will not meet with it; I am sure none will regret them.’

J.H. Monk, Life of Richard Bentley (London 1833) 2.395-96.