A federal judge dismissed a high‑profile antitrust lawsuit against the six largest commercial journal publishers, concluding plaintiffs failed to plausibly allege a conspiracy based on common editorial guidelines. The suit targeted practices around peer review, single‑submission policies and manuscript confidentiality, but the court found the publishers’ principles read as best‑practice guidance rather than evidence of collusion. At the same time in the U.K., a growing list of universities declined a proposed multi‑year deal with Elsevier, signaling mounting institutional resistance to traditional subscription models. Taken together, the legal setback for plaintiffs and the procurement refusals reflect acute pressure on scholarly publishing economics and university library budgets as campuses push for new access models and bargaining leverage.