#3
many thanks, I am completely useless at spotting such things!
I have originally ridiculed the journal by suggesting it will probably ignore the issue, but after considering the comment by Peer 3 I removed that part, as it would have been unfair to EMBO J. Actually, I only came back to this thread now and forgot that this is about EMBO J, which has generally a much better behaviour than some other, regarding literature corrections and transparency. So there is good hope for proper actions to happen eventually at EMBO J. On the other hand, there are examples of bad editorial handling, like the previous Voinnet corrections in G&D, PNAS and PLOS Genetics (the last one was actually most disappointing, OA, not part of old system at all).