[tealeg]

Almost all Elsevier development and infrastructure work is farmed out to companies in India, so they're probably not directly responsible for the cock-up, but their general attitude towards development, and their customers, probably plays a role.

[munk-a]

If you cut corners in management then you are directly responsible for the cock-up, period.

This is a modern issue with the way laws look at subcontracting work as a tool that allows companies to isolate themselves from liability which needs to change, if your company (Elsevier) sub-contracts it should be your company on the line - with an allowance to pursue legal action against the sub-contractors that will be examined in depth during that proceeding.

These sorts of situations have too often resolved in "Well, we can't tell if it was the parent or sub-contractor that was responsible, I guess we need to let them both off." instead hit the parent with the full force of the law as a negligent reseller and if they were unaware of these situations they can recoup their costs by pursuing the subcontractor on their own dime.

[maze-le]

If you decision leads to a failure like this, you are directly responsible. Responsibility for business processes are not outsourced with the IT service. When a company that has huge guaranteed profits (by nature of the academic publishing "market"-structure), and no IT skills to verify network service providers, you are responsible for not having any oversight to the processes of your company.