The Downside of Open-Access Publishing brings additional attention to the issue of “predatory publishers” in several varieties:
Some of the publishers are intentionally misleading, naming nonexistent people as their editors and editorial board members and claiming ownership of articles that they have plagiarized from other publications. Other journals and publishers on Beall’s list may be real, though it’s obvious that the people running them are not very professional, and some of the publications may have been created simply because it seemed like a clever business scheme to collect author fees of several hundred dollars apiece to post papers in a journal-like layout at a fraction of the traditional price. Viewed in some lights, such enterprises may not be unethical: thousands of researchers worldwide need to publish, and not all of them can do so in the highest-ranked journals. But it is surely problematic for journals and publishers to pretend to be something they aren’t, misleading authors, readers, and the scientific community at large.
From: NEJM Perspective by Charlotte Haug, M.D., Ph.D. “The Downside of Open-Access Publishing” N Engl J Med 2013; 368:791-793 February 28, 2013 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1214750
Beall reccommends that “researchers, scientists, and academics avoid doing business with these publishers and journals. Scholars should avoid sending article submissions to them, serving on their editorial boards or reviewing papers for them, or advertising in them.”