As academics, your institution is paying publishers to get access to journal (and you may loose access to electronic versions if the institution stops paying contrary to paper versions), you write papers for free, you review papers for free, you are part of the editorial board of the journal for free (or some crumbs for travelling to a conference), as an editor you spend most of your life managing people for a really small stipend compared to the time spent. People still do it because they believe it is useful. But current openaccess solutions that cost sometimes $5,000 are not a solution either. In both options the publishers is making the money and the researchers or their institution have to pay... There are legitimate concerns about scihub from some librarians as it doesn't allow a correct attribution of funds to ressources that are needed by researchers and there are some concerns of researchers credentials being stolen and shared (willingly and not) by scihub but also less reputable actors. University libraries are struggling with credentials reuse as they are the ones that get punished by the publishers with ban of ips or full institutions and harder contracts negotiations. Talking about those negotiations, they are all confidential, despite often using state or federal funds there is no way to know how much, what and how these secret deals are negotiated. So we still don't have a good solution. Preprints are useful, but we had already too many publications to skim through and the fact that anybody can publish anything with no filters makes finding meaningful information much harder....