Great. At the first glance I like their ideas to renew scientific publishing. Keeping the papers behind the pay wall is not a good idea. Published papers should be open for everyone. Review fee encourages the reviewers to be faster and good professors have an incentive to take part in the peer-review process. There is obviously a moral hazard for the reviewer to accepts bad papers, but the publishing company can select the reviewers and avoid lazy and dishonest ones.
Originality and technical validity are exactly the points that must be addressed. To get your research report published you must have done some real research and done it properly. That is enough. Ad hominems and plain opinions should be rejected. Evaluating the contribution is subjective and trying to keep a tight filter does not add value in a World of search engines. Good research will be found from larger masses of papers.