The market I was talking about is the academic job market, not the publishing market - the latter of which is very dysfunctional. That said, you're assuming collective action, but researchers are stuck in a prisoner's dilemma where it might be good if all of them boycotted Elsevier (and the other traditional publishers), but whoever moves first is penalised. You can't really fault researchers for not being the ones to sacrifice their academic careers (and even then some still do so - this article's author being one of them).
With this mindset of not being the first one to react, we would not have had any changes in civilization (starting with slow changes, ending with revolutions).
Startups disrupted traditional companies, low-cost services (airlines for instance) disrupted traditional services, open source disrupted traditional software.
Academia is a stone which is not disrupted by anything. No wonders that it is being pushed around.
I am definitely not saying the system cannot be disrupted (heck, I started my own non-profit that aims to do that), just that it is unfair to expect people who are aiming for an academic career to do that. Changes in civilisation have also been the result of collective action, e.g. through governmental action or by people who have nothing to lose.
