In reply to David Crotty.

Actually I quite like the analogy with public-private partnerships for public infrastructure but they tend again to inflame debate. Generally speaking in the UK the current view is that the private partners in public infrastructure projects here got ridiculously good deals - some NHS investments likely to cost double what they would have just to build them for instance. It also lets you look at the problems with different parts of the process. So for instance if we imagine a private company running a publicly built railway where the infrastructure is still maintained by government then there is no incentive to undertake the running of the railway in a way that helps support innovation in the underlying infrastructure. Similarly our private publishing industry hasn't had any real incentive to build back into the research process and support the development of better research recording, that would in turn reduce costs for publication.
Also there is a strand of economic argument that suggests that for a government it actually does make more sense to allow the use of public transport for free. The nett gains from economic activity are greater than the public subsidy - often a lot of the costs go on making sure that fares get paid, creating a nett economic drag. The question for me is one of overall benefit. How do we build the system so as to maximise outcomes. Without the funders there is no research and no publication, therefore they hold all the cards. Public and charity funders have a clear obligation to maximise the effectiveness of the investment and that's why I'm a strong believer in research communication as an integral part of the research process. Because without communication there are no outcomes - and the work may as well have not been done. But I agree this cuts both ways, my lack of sympathy for publishers trying to corner every market also extends to researchers bleating about "their research".
But yes, you can't blame private companies for seeking to maximally exploit their property. And the bottom line is that for most of our system it _is_ their property for good or ill. That's why I'm a supporter of mandates the block researchers from giving over all the rights to be honest.