John Houghton and Charles Oppenheim have rebuffed many of the claims made
around the prevalent economic model(s) of academic publishing. They support the
contention that there is much to be gained from a shift to open access dissemination
of scholarly research. While the economic case seems clear, unfortunately this is not
the whole picture; there are other costs and benefits related to the publication of
research that are not economic. Therefore, it is worth complementing their useful analysis
by raising some questions about the manner in which the academy in general has
used traditional methods of publishing to maintain and develop certain community
benefits