While I very much abhor the practices of Elsevier, one has to be really careful how one acts to push back. Even without getting into the result that not interacting with Elsevier has on careers in the biomedical sciences, it's easy to fall into traps with other publishing firms. For instance, PlosOne is a pay-to-publish "alternative". However, the motivations here are backwards. PlosOne makes money for each accepted publication and thus limits their motivation to do serious peer review. I'm not saying that means PlosOne articles are necessarily bad, the very nature of their publishing model suggests something could be wrong - and it's pretty hard to get recognition for publications through them. I personally prefer when the professional organizations, like APS, handle their own mainstream of publishing. The Phys Rev journals have a strong motivation to promote the best research, because it speaks well of the industry overall, but because they are beholden to their membership, they are less likely to promote the kind of unethical practices used by Elsevier.