it’s a company that could be used in georgia.
It’s typically the paper before you send it to the journal, 99 times out of 100 the pre-print will be identical to the paper (minus the journals logo and formatting). Universities typically have archives of their pre-prints as a way of getting round the pay walls. You tend to have to upload the version before you submit because closed journals will own copyright after the upload ( although that’s changing in the uk to having a CC BY or better licence by default).
Find a paper behind a pay wall and then have a look at axriv.org for instance, that’s a good pre-print resource.
It turns out I’ve misspoken slightly then. The rules here mean that we should only upload papers that have already been accepted for publication, which is technically a postprint. So peer reviewed and accepted, but not the version produced by the journal.
Good call on the requirement for publicly funded research to be proper open access, that’s much more likely to have a wider effect.
You are right, I think the term preprint is engrained in my mind for such repos.