Science studies scholars, including a number of historians and philosophers of science, have raised important concerns regarding the current trend towards the privatization and commercialization of scientific research. Financial conflicts of interest, several cases of scientific fraud, and research limitations from strong IP laws have all led to questioning the epistemic and social justice appropriateness of industry-funded research. At first sight, the Open Science movement, which promotes transparency, openness and accountability, seems to target precisely the type of limitations uncovered in commercially-driven research. The plea to open science, however, has primarily focused on publicly funded research. I argue that this particular focus challenges the appropriateness of OS. If OS advocates promote the openness of publicly funded research, at least in part, to foster new business opportunities and joint private-public ventures, as well as new markets for the development of online ICTs, then Open Science ends up contributing to furthering the commercialization of science, without addressing any of the epistemological and social justice limitations related to this type of research. Accordingly, the asymmetry between private and public science, present in the current plea for OS, does not seem to properly contribute to the values of transparency, democracy, and accountability that the OS movement fiercely promotes.