[tc4v]

I know you don't have a lifetime access to institutional email adress, but using a fake address is so counterproductive. You're only going to claim the paper once, and yuh ou should do it while you have access to your email. Then you update your account eith a new address.

[Sophira]

Let's say that John Smith at XYZ Corp has authored a paper. The company obviously wants recognition and so they use their corporate email address "[e-mail]".

John has since moved on and is earning more at ABC Corp instead. XYZ Corp has duly reclaimed John's old email address, and John cannot receive emails at said address any longer.

This is the situation the OP is in. It was never a "fake email address". They did not literally type "first.last@org", that was an example suitable for using in their comment.

[edit: I'm actually wrong with that last statement, as it turns out. While it wasn't a fake email address, the situation is slightly more nuanced in that OP actually did say "{first}.{last}@hhi.fraunhofer.de" in the paper, as there were multiple authors who all had the same email address format - see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41479618. I still think this is a valid method, though, and it's certainly not fake. Besides, the problem I outlined sounds like it probably remains an issue even if it's not the exact problem OP is experiencing.]

[w-m]

OP here, what I'm actually using is "{first}.{last}@hhi.fraunhofer.de" (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.13299). I see how my earlier comment was confusing.

In our case it's for saving space in the paper, and also for reducing spam. This small change may now seem silly in the age of LLMs, but the papers that have full email addresses in them get a considerable amount of fake conference and journal participation emails, which is annoying.