George Monbiot in the Guardian rails against academic publishers, "whose monopolistic practices make Walmart look like a corner shop and Rupert Murdoch a socialist... Of all corporate scams, the racket they run is most urgently in need of referral to the competition authorities."

His beef?

"Everyone claims to agree that people should be encouraged to understand science and other academic research. Without current knowledge, we cannot make coherent democratic decisions. But the publishers have slapped a padlock and a 'keep out' sign on the gates."

"The academic publishers get their articles, their peer reviewing (vetting by other researchers) and even much of their editing for free. The material they publish was commissioned and funded not by them but by us, through government research grants and academic stipends. But to see it, we must pay again, and through the nose.

"The returns are astronomical: in the past financial year, for example, Elsevier's operating profit margin was 36% (£724m on revenues of £2bn). They result from a stranglehold on the market. Elsevier, Springer and Wiley, who have bought up many of their competitors, now publish 42% of journal articles."

He proposes a number of solutions - such as cutting out the middleman and diverting library budgets to support publishing.

Monbiot has a version with references to back his claims on his own site.

The points he makes are valid and have been aired for years by open access advocates. The piece has attracted an avalanche of comment.