#greenoa — Public Fediverse posts

Update. Another article made it through peer review (at Springer) leaving the false impression in many passages that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs and that all or most APCs are to be paid by authors out of pocket. This despite the fact that it acknowledges the existence of no-APC #GreenOA and #DiamondOA, and the existence of APC funds other than the authors' pockets. It just doesn't let these acknowledgements change or qualify sweeping language in other parts of the article.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-08921-5

For example, the title and abstract talk about the high costs to authors of OA as such, when they're really about APC-based OA. Table 2 refers to the pros and cons to junior faculty of OA as such, when it's really about the pros and cons of APC-based OA.

It's so easy to say APC-based OA when you mean APC-based OA. It's so wrong to say OA without qualification when you mean APC-based OA.

Update. Another article made it through peer review (at Springer) leaving the false impression in many passages that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs and that all or most APCs are to be paid by authors out of pocket. This despite the fact that it acknowledges the existence of no-APC #GreenOA and #DiamondOA, and the existence of APC funds other than the authors' pockets. It just doesn't let these acknowledgements change or qualify sweeping language in other parts of the article.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-08921-5

For example, the title and abstract talk about the high costs to authors of OA as such, when they're really about APC-based OA. Table 2 refers to the pros and cons to junior faculty of OA as such, when it's really about the pros and cons of APC-based OA.

It's so easy to say APC-based OA when you mean APC-based OA. It's so wrong to say OA without qualification when you mean APC-based OA.

Update. Another article made it through peer review (at Springer) leaving the false impression in many passages that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs and that all or most APCs are to be paid by authors out of pocket. This despite the fact that it acknowledges the existence of no-APC #GreenOA and #DiamondOA, and the existence of APC funds other than the authors' pockets. It just doesn't let these acknowledgements change or qualify sweeping language in other parts of the article.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-08921-5

For example, the title and abstract talk about the high costs to authors of OA as such, when they're really about APC-based OA. Table 2 refers to the pros and cons to junior faculty of OA as such, when it's really about the pros and cons of APC-based OA.

It's so easy to say APC-based OA when you mean APC-based OA. It's so wrong to say OA without qualification when you mean APC-based OA.

Update. Another article made it through peer review (at Springer) leaving the false impression in many passages that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs and that all or most APCs are to be paid by authors out of pocket. This despite the fact that it acknowledges the existence of no-APC #GreenOA and #DiamondOA, and the existence of APC funds other than the authors' pockets. It just doesn't let these acknowledgements change or qualify sweeping language in other parts of the article.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-08921-5

For example, the title and abstract talk about the high costs to authors of OA as such, when they're really about APC-based OA. Table 2 refers to the pros and cons to junior faculty of OA as such, when it's really about the pros and cons of APC-based OA.

It's so easy to say APC-based OA when you mean APC-based OA. It's so wrong to say OA without qualification when you mean APC-based OA.

Update. Another article made it through peer review (at Springer) leaving the false impression in many passages that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs and that all or most APCs are to be paid by authors out of pocket. This despite the fact that it acknowledges the existence of no-APC #GreenOA and #DiamondOA, and the existence of APC funds other than the authors' pockets. It just doesn't let these acknowledgements change or qualify sweeping language in other parts of the article.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-08921-5

For example, the title and abstract talk about the high costs to authors of OA as such, when they're really about APC-based OA. Table 2 refers to the pros and cons to junior faculty of OA as such, when it's really about the pros and cons of APC-based OA.

It's so easy to say APC-based OA when you mean APC-based OA. It's so wrong to say OA without qualification when you mean APC-based OA.

@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.

But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.

But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.

But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.

But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.

But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
🔗 https://tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
#Beilstein75 #GreenOA

Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
🔗 https://tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
#Beilstein75 #GreenOA

Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
🔗 https://tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
#Beilstein75 #GreenOA

Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
🔗 https://tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
#Beilstein75 #GreenOA

Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
🔗 https://tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
#Beilstein75 #GreenOA

Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

"Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

👉 https://hal.science/hal-05654837v1

#HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

"Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

👉 https://hal.science/hal-05654837v1

#HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

"Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

👉 https://hal.science/hal-05654837v1

#HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

"Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

👉 https://hal.science/hal-05654837v1

#HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

"We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
https://www.statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-access-journal-fees-nature-wiley-elsevier-nih/
(#paywalled)

There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

* The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

* The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

* The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

#FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

"We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
https://www.statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-access-journal-fees-nature-wiley-elsevier-nih/
(#paywalled)

There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

* The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

* The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

* The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

#FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

"We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
https://www.statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-access-journal-fees-nature-wiley-elsevier-nih/
(#paywalled)

There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

* The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

* The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

* The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

#FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

"We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
https://www.statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-access-journal-fees-nature-wiley-elsevier-nih/
(#paywalled)

There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

* The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

* The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

* The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

#FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

"We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
https://www.statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-access-journal-fees-nature-wiley-elsevier-nih/
(#paywalled)

There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

* The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

* The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

* The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

#FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-universities-2026-5-university-of-nottingham-drops-five-publishing-deals/

2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Documents/Open-Access-Publications-Policy.pdf (PDF)

I shall watch with great interest...

HT @mpe

#RightsRetention #GreenOA

1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-universities-2026-5-university-of-nottingham-drops-five-publishing-deals/

2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Documents/Open-Access-Publications-Policy.pdf (PDF)

I shall watch with great interest...

HT @mpe

#RightsRetention #GreenOA

1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-universities-2026-5-university-of-nottingham-drops-five-publishing-deals/

2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Documents/Open-Access-Publications-Policy.pdf (PDF)

I shall watch with great interest...

HT @mpe

#RightsRetention #GreenOA

1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-universities-2026-5-university-of-nottingham-drops-five-publishing-deals/

2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Documents/Open-Access-Publications-Policy.pdf (PDF)

I shall watch with great interest...

HT @mpe

#RightsRetention #GreenOA

1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-universities-2026-5-university-of-nottingham-drops-five-publishing-deals/

2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Documents/Open-Access-Publications-Policy.pdf (PDF)

I shall watch with great interest...

HT @mpe

#RightsRetention #GreenOA

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory. We now have 170. oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Univ... Spread the word. The world could use many more. #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #OAD #ScholComm

University rights-retention OA...

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory. We now have 170. oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Univ... Spread the word. The world could use many more. #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #OAD #ScholComm

University rights-retention OA...

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory. We now have 170. oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Univ... Spread the word. The world could use many more. #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #OAD #ScholComm

University rights-retention OA...

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory. We now have 170. oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Univ... Spread the word. The world could use many more. #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #OAD #ScholComm

University rights-retention OA...

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory. We now have 170. oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Univ... Spread the word. The world could use many more. #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #OAD #ScholComm

University rights-retention OA...

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory (#OAD). We now have 170.
https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies

Spread the word. The world could use many more.

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory (#OAD). We now have 170.
https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies

Spread the word. The world could use many more.

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory (#OAD). We now have 170.
https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies

Spread the word. The world could use many more.

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory (#OAD). We now have 170.
https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies

Spread the word. The world could use many more.

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Update. Some colleagues and I have been collecting university #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policies for the #OpenAccessDirectory (#OAD). We now have 170.
https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies

Spread the word. The world could use many more.

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026. guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-Aut... #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Yale University Library Resear...

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026. guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-Aut... #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Yale University Library Resear...

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026. guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-Aut... #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Yale University Library Resear...

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026. guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-Aut... #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Yale University Library Resear...

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026. guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-Aut... #Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Yale University Library Resear...

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026.
https://guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-AuthorRightsPolicy

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026.
https://guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-AuthorRightsPolicy

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026.
https://guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-AuthorRightsPolicy

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026.
https://guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-AuthorRightsPolicy

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

Kudos to #Yale for adopting a #RightsRetention #OpenAccess policy, to take effect July 1, 2026.
https://guides.library.yale.edu/FAS-SEAS-AuthorRightsPolicy

#Academia #Copyright #GreenOA #ScholComm

April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
🔸 #OAForward initiative
🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
🔸 National vision for archives in England
🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
https://mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/british-library-scholarly-communications-newsletter-april-2026

April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
🔸 #OAForward initiative
🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
🔸 National vision for archives in England
🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
https://mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/british-library-scholarly-communications-newsletter-april-2026

April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
🔸 #OAForward initiative
🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
🔸 National vision for archives in England
🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
https://mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/british-library-scholarly-communications-newsletter-april-2026

April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
🔸 #OAForward initiative
🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
🔸 National vision for archives in England
🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
https://mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/british-library-scholarly-communications-newsletter-april-2026

April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
🔸 #OAForward initiative
🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
🔸 National vision for archives in England
🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
https://mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/british-library-scholarly-communications-newsletter-april-2026

As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

#CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026/04/01/why-we-wont-be-funding-open-access-publishing-any-more/

PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/#rec-3

Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

* Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

* Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

* It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

* It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

#ScholComm