MIT Press's Amy Brand, [in an October Scholarly Kitchn post marking Crossref's 20th anniversary](

> The visionary publishers who formed Crossref, and the staff who have run it from the start, should feel extremely proud of the organization they created – not least for its success as technical infrastructure, but also, arguably, as the scholarly information community’s most extensive, impactful, and stable consortium.

The [post]( is really a warning. If the academic community isn't careful, the big commercial publishers—CrossRef members, in a sleeping-with-the-enemy sense—may block CrossRef from expanding its infrastructure remit:

> It behooves the leaders of today’s research institutions to explore fully the implications of commercial control of research data, analytics, and infrastructure, along with the potential for community-owned alternatives. The prospect of an open metadata commons for digital scholarship, and open infrastructure for computing over that data, may be less exciting for entities who intend to grow revenues from their technology and analytics products than it is for other publishers, because of how it might compete with their current and future offering.

Roger Schonfeld, in his [recent piece on researcher identity](, echoed Brand's warning.