Dr Ross Mounce writes about the scale of the problem with regards to Elsevier selling Open Access material.
Elsevier's position statement - “We’ve gone through the system, this is the only article affected.”
1.) Will Elsevier openly publish on a single web page, on a continuous, ongoing basis, the exact DOIs of all articles that Elsevier has been paid to make “hybridOA” , including the DOIs of articles that Elsevier were paid to make open access, that now reside at journals published by other publishers (if the journal was subsequently transferred to another publisher) ?
This will enable any interested party to:
a) Check that each and every one is actually freely accessible from the publisher site landing page
b) This ‘master list’ of Elsevier hybridOA can be cross-checked against institutionally-held lists of paid invoices. Any articles listed by an institution as paid-for OA, but not on Elsevier’s hybridOA ‘master list’ can be further investigated, to perhaps further reveal more articles that should be “open access” that Elsevier’s faulty “system” has overlooked.
2.) Will Elsevier refund 100% of the paid APC to each institution, funder, or individual that has a wrongly paywalled paid-for “open access” article behind a paywall?
3.) Will Elsevier hire and fully pay for an independent 3rd party forensic accounting firm to go through their pay-per-view and re-use licensing data/systems and records, including the period from January 1st 2005 until today (23rd February 2017), to produce a thorough openly available report on the extent of PPV payments AND re-use licensing payments for articles that should not have been sold to access, or to re-use?
Read his full post for further details - Seeking Justice For Readers