Friends, Greetings from Chennai. Please see Cancelling the ‘Big Deal’ at a Public University: A Discussion of STEM Faculty Perceptions of Cancellation and Post-Cancellation Usage Data | Practical Academic Librarianship: The International Journal of the SLA Academic Division https://pal-ojs-tamu.tdl.org/pal/article/view/7193 . Also read the policy of the journal given under 'License.' In India, the journals published by the Science Academies DO NOT HAVE such a licensing policy. Simply because they have abjectly sold their souls to Springer. Right now the Academy journals are listed under Springer in international citation databases such as *Web of Science*. Springer is selling reprints of papers published in our Academy journals outside India and sharing the profit with our Academies. Contrary to what the Academies may claim, their journals are NOT open access. You may wonder why I am bothered about it. Not just because I did much of the editing and publishing work at the IASc in Bangalore for two years in the mid 1970s. Not because I was the one who suggested the idea of breaking away from the *Proceedings* and publishing subject-specific journals at IASc starting with *Pramana*. But because for me the very idea of giving away our journals to a commercial publisher is obnoxious. *Raman and Saha would be turning in their graves ever since.* In my view, 0ur Academies have dishonoured their own founding fathers. The minimum they could do now is to get out of the contract with Springer and be on their own. Correct me if I am wrong that DST is supporting these Academies (with taxpayers' money), especially their journal publishing programmes. And we keep saying "Bharath Mahan,' 'Make in India,' and 'we are on our way to becoming a superpower.' Actually, when Springer approached me first (then I was with MSSRF, Chennai), they were keen on *Current Science*, which would have been an ideal companion journal to Nature. I took them met Prof. M S Swaminathan, who was Chairman of the Current Science Association (or ex-Chairman). He told them that they should speak to Prof. Balaram as he was actually involved in managing the day-to-day affairs of *Current Science*, and they went to Bangalore by the next available flight. Prof. Balaram, obviously, did not agree to their proposal. And till this day C*urrent Science* continues to be the independent journal it has always been. But the Academy yielded. The other two Academies followed. Look at *Indian Journal of Medical Ethics,* if you want to learn how a good journal could be run as a 'community-led' effort. Busy doctors - physicians, surgeons, medical researchers - take time to redit, referee and all else needed to run a good journal. I have the privilege of having published a paper in IJME. When it finally appeared in the journal it was a far better version than I and my colleagues had submitted. Leading physicians and surgeons of India (who may not approve my naming them here) spent considerable time to add value to our paper. And they will *never *think of pledging their journal to Springer or any other publisher. I am sure they would not have approved govt agencies underwriting APC either. Raman and saha, had they been alive today, would have been proud of them. With warm regards, Arun http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4398-4658 http://www.researcherid.com/rid/B-9925-2009