diff --git a/dosp-survey.ltx b/dosp-survey.ltx
index e369d5ea26f53c1877557870e3a952f8d0d25c5b..cde7826355c11a2a6862ef9f8ec8363afd0c300c 100644
--- a/dosp-survey.ltx
+++ b/dosp-survey.ltx
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ implementation of each feature to sponsors first:
 While we fully intend to make the full SLYR plugin open source and freely publish the style/LYR/MXD conversion tools, we also require financial backing in order to support the significant time required to completely reverse engineer these file formats and develop quality tools supporting their use outside of the ESRI software ecosystem. Accordingly, the specifications and file parsing library will initially be closed source and available to SLYR license holders only. Exactly six months after we hit the pledged sponsorship levels for each stage of the project (check the progress below for each stage), we will open-source that component of the code and update the community version of the plugin.
 \end{quote}
 
-% 
+This strategy was also used by the OPSI project, which created a bounty-like ``co-funding" mechanism, which is still alluded to on the associated company's web site. Under this model, customers could sponsor the development of particular features, which would initially be available to sponsors and later to the public. However, this mechanism appears to have fallen out of use, as there are no recent co-funding opportunities, and the project currently appears to follow an open core model with paid subscriptions for proprietary extensions.
 
 \subsection{The Business Source License (BUSL)}\label{busl}
 
@@ -476,6 +476,19 @@ there was usually no public commitment to do so on any particular
 schedule or under any particular circumstances.  This practice is thus not
 a core example of DOSP.
 
+A ``delayed open-access" model, applied to research articles, has become
+popular for academic journals as a compromise between more restrictive
+journal licensing and open-access publishing.\footnote{See
+\otsurl{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed\_open-access\_journal}.}
+As of November 2023, Wikipedia identifies by name 108 journals that
+currently follow some form of this model, but cites a 2013 study that
+reportedly reviewed 492 journals with such a policy. In this context,
+journals may apply an ``embargo period" to create an incentive for some
+journal users to pay for subscriptions or article access in order to
+read recent research. The license terms applied at the expiration of these
+embargo periods permit the public to read articles at no charge, but
+may or may not be equivalent to open source licensing.
+
 \numberedsection{Sources and References}\label{sources}
 
 \begin{itemize}