Dear [PROFESSOR],
I’m so sorry that disreputable publishers are suggesting false affiliations with you. I agree -- these aren’t even real societies; they’re sites set up to look close enough to real societies so that they can try to profit from solicitations of scholarship. And it’s incredibly frustrating.
While I am a lawyer and my office provides support in publishing matters (including issues like these), I must explain that I’m not counsel for the university or for you. So the upshot of this is that I cannot provide legal advice, but I can help you understand the law and what options you may have. You will need to consider the explanations below and decide how to move forward--whether through sending some of my sample language to publishers yourself, or retaining outside counsel if the publishers do not accede to the demands. Of course you can also contact university counsel, but typically they respond by indicating that they’re also not lawyers for the faculty and would just refer you to my office for general guidance. (Again, it’s an option to contact them though.)
The short of this from a legal perspective is that suggesting an editorial affiliation between you and these journals or publishers can constitute various types of fraud (federal and state law), unfair business practices (state), and privacy violations (specifically, the right of publicity; state law). You likely do not need to worry at the moment about which state’s law to apply -- you’re in California and can reasonably complain to them about their violation of your rights in California.
We think that it is worth sending a letter (sample attached) asking these publishers to take down your name and affiliation and remove all related metadata and author profiles. You could send this to any known email address that you have for them, including also their CEO, online admin contacts, and certified Web Agent addresses (which you can often find online through https://www.whois.com/).
A few notes about the sample language I have drafted for you:
The communication should come directly from you. Unfortunately, for legal reasons, we can’t write to the publishers on your behalf, and it would be best that we not be copied on the correspondence. We have merely offered sample language which states what the law actually is.
You’ll see in the sample letter that we have restated the facts as we understand them, but you should definitely edit so that they conform to what actually happened.
I have strongly worded the language to let the publishers know that you understand their actions may be fraudulent and deceptive, and that you also understand the legal implications of that. While we have indicated that you wish to resolve the matter amicably, you should give some thought about how strong an approach you wish to take with them.
You can let us know how they respond to your letter, and we can provide thoughts on the next steps and actions to take.
Separately, regardless of whether you choose to send these publishers a letter directly, you can also file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). As we explain in the letter, the FTC is well aware of deceptive publishers who falsely represent editorial affiliations and have enjoined another such publisher (OMICS) regarding similarly-fraudulent representations and actions.
Please review the suggested language below and let us know if you have any questions or concerns. Once again, we’re very sorry you are going through this, and we hope everything will work out.
Best,
Rachael