The rapid evolution of academic publishing toward open access (OA) models has introduced Article Processing Charges (APCs), shifting the financial burden of publication onto researchers. While OA is often promoted as a democratizing force in scholarly communication, the reality is that APCs have deepened academic inequities, particularly affecting scholars from low- and middle-income countries, early-career researchers, and underfunded institutions. This opinion article reflects on two decades of publishing experience and examines the systemic issues surrounding APCs, including the exploitation of peer reviewers, the inconsistent funding structures for authors, and the growing commercialization of research dissemination. Drawing on recent literature, the article advocates for more equitable alternatives, such as diamond OA models, and calls for policy reforms and greater transparency in APC funding. The central argument underscores the need to restore the core academic value of knowledge as a public good, rather than a commodified privilege limited by financial capacity.