Scholarly Open Access

44 Responses to MedCrave Update: It’s Still a Dangerous, Predatory Publisher

1. Superman says:

   November 3, 2016 at 10:45 AM

   If they ask you for money, simply do NOT pay. They will continue to spam your inbox with almost daily emails and will even try to persuade you by reducing the fee from a “minor contribution” of 1000$ to 100$.

   They will obviously not start any sort of legal action simply because they are scammers practicing illegal activities.

   Their English is nauseating:

   “Dear Dr. Superman

   Hope you had a great week and wishing you a great weekend.

   Well we have been shooting emails regarding your payment of $100 for your manuscript. In this case, we have been falling into deficit to survive with Open Access without having support from any organization.
   So please be a part of us and let us have some contribution from authors only to move on ahead.

   Hope you felt our complications and anticipating to have your kind contribution at the earliest to step into next month with full of energy.

   Await your reply.

   Best Regards,
   Harry White”

   Reply
2. BM says:

   November 3, 2016 at 10:47 AM

   Reposting my comment here:

   “I contacted the legal department at my university after they published an article without copyright transfer.
   The department contacted the proper authorities and through some “detective” work of their own, managed to officially find their location and the people in charge.
   They have sent a cease and desist notification to their electronic and physical address in order to retract the paper. My institution assured me that if they do not do so, that they have the means to prosecute them in India through a proxy attorney. It appears it has not been the first time my institution had to deal with copyright infringement overseas, so I guess they have some experience with such matters.
   If they do not retract the paper I will keep you guys informed of what happens.”

   Reply
3. JoshCan says:

   November 3, 2016 at 10:52 AM

   “Some of this publisher’s articles have been indexed in PubMed”

   Where? I have yet to find any article of this fraudulent journal on PubMed.

   Reply
   • Jeffrey Beall says:

     November 3, 2016 at 11:10 AM

     Here’s one.

     Reply
     • JoshCan says:

       November 3, 2016 at 11:15 AM

       You’re right, I’m flabbergasted. How can this be?

     • Greenester says:

       November 3, 2016 at 3:51 PM

       Easy, as far as I know, when an author have a funding from NIH or some other associated organisms, s/he can submit his paper to PubMed.

4. JoshCan says:

   November 3, 2016 at 11:06 AM

   “The publisher is a clone of OMICS International in the sense that it copies their predatory, exploitative, and dishonest business practices”.

   I think medcrave is much, much worse. I mean, has anyone ever seen OMICS impersonate various fake profiles and spam Quora/facebook/linkedin with ridiculous praise messages in some sort of weird language that I can only understand to be broken English?

   This medcrave crap doesn’t even manage to look like a credible journal (medcrave? what kind of bogus name is that?). I feel this farce is operated by people that have absolutely no basic understanding of anything science related.

   Just search the words “sh*t” and “medcrave” together and you get a couple of articles published with foul language. This is disgusting.

   Reply
   • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

     November 3, 2016 at 3:12 PM

     has anyone ever seen OMICS impersonate various fake profiles

     OMICS definitely infest LinkedIn with phony identities. There is a “Jessie Rose”, “Sr. Event Manager, Biostatistics 2016
     Conference”, who promotes scamferences in OMICS’ bogus ConferenceEvents series.

     Oddly enough, “Jessie Rose” is also part of the LinkedIn harem of invariably European female names from the MedCrave editorial office.
     https://www.linkedin.com/in/jessie-rose-43133bb5

     This could denote a link between MedCrave and OMICS, but it could be coincidence, as both are generating their profiles from the same small name-space.

     I grant you that MedCrave are most industrious. Here’s “Celina Jones”, “Assistant Editor for Journal of Nanomedicine Research”.
     https://www.linkedin.com/in/celina-jones-a65613a1
     I single Celina out for having previous experience at “Prik Publications”, which appears to exist in some other time-line, since there is no sign of its existence in consensus reality.

     The Jones family is particularly well-represented in the harem. “Nancy Jönes” somehow acquired an umlaut, perhaps for the same of variety:
     https://www.linkedin.com/in/nancy-j%C3%B6nes-a35283115
     Too many umlauts set off my Irritable Vowel Syndrome.

     spam Quora/facebook/linkedin with ridiculous praise messages in some sort of weird language that I can only understand to be broken English?

     The Quora threads —
     https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-get-rid-of-the-rumours-about-Medcrave-Predatory-Publisher
     and
     https://www.quora.com/What-is-Medcrave-predatory-publisher

     are entertaining, if only as a display of literary pathology. There is a large dramatis personae, with all the names drawn from the same name-space, and all using the same broken Indlish. The author needs to learn how to vary his characters’ voices if he wants his theatrical scripts to be more convincing.

     Reply
     • JoshCan says:

       November 3, 2016 at 4:10 PM

       *clap*clap*clap*

       I stand corrected. Brilliant post Herr Doktor, made me laugh more than the Quora threads that display the proper use of this ancient and most distinguished language that is “Ingrlish”.

       Btw, maybe Celina Jones missed a “c” in Prik … ?

     • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

       November 3, 2016 at 5:05 PM

       Not to forget “Nancy Jones” (no umlaut)
       https://nz.linkedin.com/in/nancy-jones-7b579b94

       and “Jones Nancy”
       https://nz.linkedin.com/in/jones-nancy-6567699a

     • Jeffrey Beall says:

       November 3, 2016 at 5:49 PM

       Or Betty Jones & Sisters Publishing.

     • JoshCan says:

       November 3, 2016 at 5:52 PM

       lolol oh god no more, can’t stop laughing.

     • JoshCan says:

       November 3, 2016 at 5:59 PM

       I bet MedCrap people read this blog but the funny thing is I’m quite sure they can’t understand all the sarcasm going on.

     • Keith says:

       November 4, 2016 at 7:08 AM

       Check out another hilariously bullet-to-foot attempt at defending MedCrave:

       http://medcrave-publisher.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/what-avoids-rumors-about-medcrave.html

       “The medical work and scientific content are peer reviewed by the Editor.”

       I don’t think they know what “peer review” means…

     • JoshCan says:

       November 4, 2016 at 8:48 AM

       This is pathetic, their English is getting worse and worse.

     • Marco says:

       November 5, 2016 at 4:55 AM

       Thanks for that, Keith, you made me take a look at their blog…

       The last one is quite funny, since they call themselves a “rumored online distributor”. So they don’t even know themselves whether they are or not…
       http://medcrave-publisher.blogspot.dk/2016/09/explore-all-type-of-science-content.html

       But this one (thanks to the poor English) really is great:
       http://medcrave-publisher.blogspot.dk/2016/09/explore-all-type-of-science-content.html
       Apparently, one requirement for getting a Best Paper of the Year award is that “The paper put together by the researcher ought to be not have references and thoughts of different researchers for being qualified for the honor”.
       No references in your paper, you hear! We won’t have it!

       Elsewhere they also claim they are not on Beall’s list in various strange ways. For example: “The unauthentic media resources have spread rumors previously that Medcrave was featured in Predatory Publishers List but no authenticity have been confirmed the rumors about Medcrave Predatory Publisher.”
       and
       “MedCrave is Never Featured in Predatory Publishers List”
       which is at least a little bit more coherent than
       “They never featured in MedCrave Predatory Publisher List”
       So, Medcrave has its own list, then? ;-)

     • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

       November 5, 2016 at 3:02 PM

       More and more I incline to the view that those Quora threads are satires, set up by someone who holds a grudge against MedCrave and is trying to hard to ensure that any search for “Medcrave” brings the searcher to the word “predatory”.

       The same applies to the blog mentioned by Keith and Marco —
       http://medcrave-publisher.blogspot.com/search/label/new%20clone%20of%20omics%20publishing%20group
       — it links to the Quora threads, and regularly reminds readers that “MedCrave Never Featured in Predatory Publishers List.”

       It also refers readers to a companion blog with the same design
       http://cloneomicspublishinggroup.blogspot.com/
       and an associated slide show

       New Clone of Omics Publishing Group from New clone of omics publishing group

       And a WordPress version as well:
       https://medcraveonline.wordpress.com/medcrave-e-books-publishing-support-only-original-work/

       which are all excuses to say “We deny and refute the accusations made against us, that we are predatory OMICS clones! We are a totally reputable above-board publisher, interested only in spreading information around, and by the way, those accusations against us, here they are again! Did we mention that accusations have been made against us?”.

       Someone has had fun writing the blog posts in a tone of sustained tongue-in-cheek denial, and the same Indglish style as the Quora threads. If the author of the whole spoof is reading this, Bravo! And I apologise for my earlier criticisms.

       Some of the blogposts include a Location:
       https://www.google.com/maps/place/37%C2%B005'24.9%22N+95%C2%B042'46.4%22W/@37.09024,-95.7150797,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d37.09024!4d-95.712891
       It points to a corner of a field in Independence, Kansas. I suspect this to be an in-joke, known only to the pranksters. Someone has added a note to Google Maps that Sandy Garvin, Fine Art is located on that corner of a field, but this is implausible (since Sandy Garvin is also described as residing in Lyme, CT). There are shenanigans going on.

     • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

       November 5, 2016 at 3:19 PM

       See also
       https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/medcrave-predatory-publisher-hoax#/entity
       and
       http://medcravenotpredatorypublisher.podbean.com/

     • JoshCan says:

       November 5, 2016 at 9:13 PM

       Doktor, you’re giving them too much credit by excusing them from being responsible for their own bad advertisement.

       I wholeheartedly believe they are capable individuals! Though I have to admit I submitted a couple of prank articles about sh*tology, with pictures of sh*t, just for the heck of it.

     • BG says:

       November 8, 2016 at 4:03 AM

       Definitely some gold in the Quora threads:

       “Science is a wide idea and it can be an overwhelming undertaking for individuals to infer pertinent data on unmistakable parts of science, however this issue has been determined by MedCrave.”

       They offer “a variety of diaries, articles, ebooks, recordings, and so on science.”

       “They trust in supporting their sprouting and awesome work through monetary backing.”

       “Medcrave is one of the best website to get access of science videos, journals and many more thing. Me and even no one would believe about this rumour. They are in this industry from the last many years and providing services in a full swing.”

       Further down someone recommends their e-Books: “Sulpyco Method: A New Quantum and Integrative Approach to Depression, Correction of Leg Deformities and Restoration of Function of Leg Bones by llizarov Techniques 1st edition, Smoking may lead to Bank Robbery- The True Trial and Tribulations of a Jewish Bank Robber” lol

5. okolie paul says:

   November 3, 2016 at 11:31 AM

   Please is international journal of arts and sciences predatory?www.ijas

   Reply
   • Jeffrey Beall says:

     November 3, 2016 at 11:59 AM

     Despite the name, this is really a conference organizer, not a publisher. And it acts more like a travel agency. I recommend you steer clear of this firm. It is not very scholarly. It’s a for-profit business that seeks funds from department travel funds. Please find a real conference from a non-profit scholarly society instead.

     Reply
6. Herr Doktor Bimler says:

   November 3, 2016 at 1:33 PM

   Neuroskeptic also reported receiving one of these pathetic requests for charity. As if they somehow need a certain minimum number of PDFs in each month’s “issue” webpage before they can “publish” it.

   Predatory journal spam reaches new lows: this journal begs you to submit because otherwise they can't publish their next issue! pic.twitter.com/LU1HCubLFH

   — Neuroskeptic (@Neuro_Skeptic) November 1, 2016

   Reply
7. BM says:

   November 3, 2016 at 1:45 PM

   UPDATE:

   Regarding my last post, apparently the cease and desist letter sent by the legal department resulted in the paper “retraction”, though other files and a lot of information related to the article is still available online.
   My institution mentioned they have contacted a law firm in India that specializes in copyright violations, caters to foreign clients and apparently is very efficient in lawsuits against Indian nationals who violate international copyright laws. They couldn’t give me more details because things just became “official” and they consider that the institution is the client that has its rights being trespassed (and not me).
   It appears that if things aren’t properly resolved you might be looking at the first case in which some of these shandy figures might come into the light and maybe, who knows, see some of that light through a jail window.

   Reply
   • Marco says:

     November 5, 2016 at 4:56 AM

     Keep us posted, BM. The world of science already has problems enough, we really could do without these scammers.

     Reply
8. Joseph Enegela says:

   November 4, 2016 at 1:52 AM

   Thanks Jeffrey for you good work. I want to know if journals can get off your predatory list and how they can accomplish that.

   Reply
   • Keith says:

     November 4, 2016 at 6:15 AM

     There’s an Appeals page at https://scholarlyoa.com/other-pages/appeals/ , where requests to have journals removed can be submitted. I believe a review panel (i.e. people other than Jeffrey) then consider the request.

     Obviously, to ensure a successful appeal (or to avoid ending up on the list in the first place), a journal/publisher needs to avoid/curtail actual predatory behaviour (fraudulent claims, hidden charges, lack of peer review when advertised, etc.) or behaviour resembling that of a predatory publisher (spam, badly formatted websites, huge numbers of generically named journals, inadequate proofreading/peer review, etc.).

     Reply
     • Joseph Enegela says:

       November 4, 2016 at 8:08 AM

       Thanks Keith.

9. JoshCan says:

   November 4, 2016 at 11:20 AM

   Its funny how these e-mails are sent during daytime hours in India and very late at night in the US where their headquarters supposedly are.

   Reply
10. wandroid says:

    November 5, 2016 at 4:08 PM

    Would you please check http://journalspress.com ? I guess is a new journal publisher. is the journal have possibility became a predatory journal ?

    thanks

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      November 5, 2016 at 8:32 PM

      The link goes to a Taylor & Francis journal, and that publisher is not considered a predatory publisher.

      Reply
      • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

        November 6, 2016 at 12:42 AM

        Wandroid’s link led me to “London Journals Press”, with no indication of T&F association. But they seem to be subscription based, with no sign of publication fees.

      • Marco says:

        November 6, 2016 at 4:32 AM

        It’s indeed not a T&F journal. And while it is subscription-based, it is so in the weirdest possible way: you are apparently not allowed to see the contents of any of the journals, not even the titles of the alleged papers, until you subscribe. And Editorial Boards are a complete mystery, too.

        Also, they claim to be “affiliated with the US Open Association of Research Society”, which AFAIK is a bogus organization.

        The phone number that is given, +444 118 965 4033, does not seem to fit any known UK phone numbering. The +44 is the UK country code alright, but the UK numbering has at most 10 digits. there’s 11 left in that phone number (12 if you add the usual leading zero)! Also, AFAIK there’s no 04 numbers in the UK (they are reserved). Any Brits here to confirm?

        The address is also weird, since there is no such thing as a “pin” code in UK addresses. However, and maybe just coincidence, they do use the indication “pin” in India for what we would call postal codes.

        But it gets interesting in the FAQs:
        http://journalspress.com/contact/faqs

        One of the FAQs is the question “Is it necessary to register every co-author to the Global Journals?”

        And the answer to the question “How can I contact an Editor or Associate Editor?” is…

        Drum roll please…

        “No you should not. Contacting directly to Editor Board/Peer Reviewer regarding paper is strictly prohibited. This comes under unfair means as all journals published by Global Journals Inc. (US) are double blind peer reviewed.”

        In other words, it appears Global Journals are now trying a new form of “pay-to-publish”, which involves you having to pay for a membership to read your own paper and those of others. Gets you free from Beall’s list, because not “Open Access”…

      • Jeffrey Beall says:

        November 6, 2016 at 5:02 AM

        For some reason, the links, including these in Marco’s comment here, keep sending me to a T&F journal.

      • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

        November 6, 2016 at 1:01 PM

        “affiliated with the US Open Association of Research Society”, which AFAIK is a bogus organization.

        Oh well-spotted. The “US OARS” is simply another branch of the Global Journal operation. I am going to go out on a limb and speculate that anyone else claiming to belong to the OARS is also another branch. Like, for instance, “Gateway Journals”, which has much in common with London Journals.

        It appears that Global Journals have issues with ScholarlyOA. Here is an account from someone who corresponded with them:

        I replied to “Dr R K Dixit”, stating that I didn’t wish to have anything to do with any publisher on the Beall’s List. […]
        However, in the bits I could understand, he seemed to be giving Jeffrey Beall a right slagging off! Mills accused Beall of being a “mere librarian” of “fully questionable authenticity”, with “limitations” and a “shallow and misguiding” knowledge of research. He accused him of playing “dirty tricks” because he allegedly works for a “mafia” of “Commercial Capitalists”, paid commission by certain big-name publishers to champion their pay-for-access journals over those with an OA model. He even accused Mr Beall of setting up a fake Nigerian mirror of the GJI home page, though quite why he’d want to do that, I have no idea.

        The phone number that is given, +444 118 965 4033, does not seem to fit any known UK phone numbering.
        I’m guessing that they stuttered with the initial prefix. “+44 118…” would be a perfectly cromulent Reading number. But their address is also round the whack (as Marco points out):

        London Journals Press, 1210th, Waterside
        Dr, Arlington Building, Theale, Reading,
        Pin: RG7-4TY,

        is more likely to be “Building 1210” (or “1210 Parkview”), Arlington Business Park. But there is no “London Journals Press” company listed at that post-code. I’m guessing that one of the companies that is based there, is a mail-forwarding service.

        For some reason, the links, including these in Marco’s comment here, keep sending me to a T&F journal.

        Perhaps they have found some way to detect the source of the queries, and to redirect you. You may have to go through an anonymising service. Try their LinkedIn account (currently Liked by two programmers in Madhya Pradesh), or Facebook (also popular with Madhya Pradesh hackers).
        ———————————–
        Before I forget, here’s a little anecdote about Dr. R. K. “Ipse” Dixit of Global Journals, and his attempts to recruit dead people to the Editorial Board.

        In the case of “London Journals”, they haven’t bothered trying to recruit editors; they simply scraped a pre-harvested list of names from SCIRP editorial boards.

      • Joe says:

        November 8, 2016 at 12:29 PM

        journalspress.com is using a site template very similar to that of T&F. Try going to http://journalspress.com/about-us/about-us to see if it stops redirecting you. They’ve spent a lot of time making it look like a respectable journal site, moreso than some others. The language is still off, though, e.g., “The organisation is inclined to promote valuable research publishing and boost research and development worldwide. Services are predominantly provided in the fields of research, publishing and education.

        Our paper publishing process undergoes various phases to publish reviewed, authentic and innovative research papers. The process of publishing encompasses editorial board review, peer review, filtering, expert editing, publishing, distribution and copyrighting. With the use of leading-edge technologies, we aim to make publishing more secure, plagiarism-free and approachable for researchers globally. To increase the outreach of authors’ research publications, our website provides research papers and articles that can be viewed in multiple formats, 3D Virtual Online Journal, Indexed Documents, Signed PDFs, and Standardized Websites, available through subscription.”

      • Herr Doktor Bimler says:

        November 8, 2016 at 2:52 PM

        The language is still off, though, e.g.

        And there is the same saccharine motivational-poster stink to (London) journalspress as there is to the Dixit dynasty’s* other exercises in income harvesting — Global Journals, Gateway Journals and the Open Association of Research Society. A miasma of inspiring quotes purportedly from famous scientists.

        * As well as R.K.Dixit, “Chief Author (Hon)”, Suyog and Suyash are following the family scam:

        Suyog belongs to highly reputed Dixit family of Indore and is the eldest son of Dr.R.K.Dixit. He is born computer geek. He is M. Tech, BE (HONS. in CSE), FARSC, SAP Certified Consultant, and CEO at IOSRD, OARS, working as President & Vice Chancellor of OSS, and as Dean, Global Journals Inc. (USA).
        Suyog is most ambitious, go-getter, polite, well-mannered, highly talented person having attractive personality and free from any bad habits. He is devoted to innovation, creativity and perfection. He is an eyes apple of his parents, colleagues and all employees. Suyog likes to spend his quality time in programming, web designing, Physics exploration, photography and music.

11. Israil says:

    November 6, 2016 at 7:42 PM

    Hello Professor, What do you think about erih verified journals? Erih is a list of journals verified by European Science Foundation and Norwegian Data Agency.

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      November 8, 2016 at 9:06 AM

      I think their standards for inclusion are too low.

      Reply
12. mi says:

    November 7, 2016 at 7:28 PM

    Academic Research Publishing Group is going start a new publication company : Noble Academic Publisher. Please click on that link : http://napublisher.org/?ic=fee&id=8. Company using the same name for payment.

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      November 8, 2016 at 12:16 PM

      Thanks. This publisher is now included on my list.

      Reply
13. Hugo van den Berg says:

    November 8, 2016 at 5:28 AM

    The use of enticing names such as “Scarlett Reynolds,” with their reassuringly Caucasian allure, brings to mind a certain pay-to-listen service that used to be offered over the phone…

    Reply
14. Sofia says:

    November 30, 2016 at 3:40 AM

    Dear Mr Beall,
    I notice you have not commented on Scientific Research Publishing in almost two years. I assume it is still a dangerous predatory publisher, or?

    Kind regards,
    Sofia

    Reply
    • Jeffrey Beall says:

      November 30, 2016 at 3:53 AM

      Yes, it is a publisher all researchers should avoid, in my opinion.

      Reply

Leave a Reply -- All comments are subject to moderation, including removal. Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.