This probably won’t work right away, given AAA’s and UC Press’s current business models…

Exactly. That is why we are going ahead without them. Perhaps they will then feel the pressure to step in and do something …

suffered no significant decline in subscriptions.

The problem is that subscriptions are hurting already. The question is how best to fix the problem. AnthroSource is already hurting subscriptions, without necessarily offering much in return.

There are other professional societies that have released their content openly after an embargo period (two to six months? it varies), and suffered no significant decline in subscriptions. These are in the physical sciences, where the timeliness of the publication is considered quite significant. That is, new articles are taken as more valuable than older ones. Anthropology scholarship might be relevant for a longer period (or, to put it another way, less immediately “necessary” upon publication). The consequence might be that AAA subscriptions would erode substantially — if we know we will have access to all articles eventually and for the indefinite future, how many of us would subscribe to the journal (or join the association?)

The counter to this is that if scholars want to support open access to their work they may find that the best way to do this is through their societies… working to fund their activities differently from today’s business model, but recognizing the need for a reliable stream of revenue to keep journals and other services afloat.