Your above comments reflect exactly what I am saying.
I also agree that there is no justification for lying or hiding information, but is the “country of original” such an important criteria that anyone not disclosing it must be branded “predatory”? It has absolutely no relation to the publishing practices. “Publishing” plagiarized content – bad; “Publishing” low quality content – bad; “No” peer review – bad; “No” editorial review – bad; BUT Country of Origin?
You said “…most articles in these open-access, low standard journals come from developing and underdeveloped countries”,
So you also think that developing and underdeveloped countries publish low quality, low standard journals? How did you know that the journals are of low standard? Have you published in any such journal and observed its practices or your observation based only on – the address?
People from underdeveloped and developing countries do not publish articles – “Just because these countries need a place to increment the curricula of its academics.” – Very wrong statement, and it is true for every country.
“honest journals based on developing and underdeveloped countries, with the purpose of publishing research of regional relevance.” – So journal from developing and underdeveloped countries should publish research of regional significance.
Does a journals from developing or an underdeveloped country no right to be GLOBAL? Do you really think that PLOS or Biomed Central would have been this successful if they had been started from Mongolia or Indian or Sri Lanka.
Bottom line is – bias exists; processes never get a chance to be matter, and even if they do it is at a regional level – everything that matters is the – country or the address.
