Here's an idea, premised on a pair of observations: (1) open access is now inevitable, at least for the journal literature; but in (2) an APC/read-and-publish package. There are lots of exceptions and byways, but the momentum—thanks in part to Plan S—is with an OA system financed by author charges. Let's stipulate that as a fact-in-motion, for the sake of argument.
If that's true, or largely true, OA advocates should consider a shift in focus. Our attention has been on access, for all the obvious and laudable reasons. Now the regime that we helped usher in is toppling that barrier, for readers, by erecting another, for authors. We should be fighting that tradeoff as unnecessary and unjust.
We could, I think, deploy some of the same language and logic to the fights against APCs and read-and-publish deals. I propose the **Open Authorship** label, together with its evil, **Closed Authorship** twin—to map onto platinum/diamond and gold, respectively. Lots of OA and scholarly publishing vocabulary is poised for retrofit: **Tolled Authorship Journals**, **Author Embargoes**, **Author Exclusion Charges** and the like. As in: Sorry, I don't review for closed authorship (CA) journals.
The point would be to resist what increasingly looks like a capital "P" Pyrrhic victory.