Open-Source Software is the Endgame
Open-Source Software (OSS) is something close to a miracle in an society with so many economic incentives.
Not only it is completely given away for free to users, but it has intrinsically no way to make money. The source code is available under licenses that allows anyone to “fork” the project, meaning to take the code and drive it in a different direction.
In OSS communities, the incentives are set up so that, on the slightest hint that the original project no longer serves the users the best, another user-focused project sprawls up and fill is that space.
For example, Plex was a popular way to self-host content, such as movies and music, on your own computer to serve it on your own home network (something that is allowed by US copyright laws -- the analogous to recording a VHS tape). Once that project got traction, it tried to “monetize” and “pivot” into more commercial interests that ran afoul to user experience.
Not long after, the Jellyfin project appeared to pretty much fill the same purpose, but with the user's best interest in mind -- and also no way to make money, by design.
There are a few other examples: the Redis IP got acquired by business-minded individuals and introduced some hostile terms of usage. The Redis codebase got promptly forked by the Linux Foundation into ValKey, effectively going back to community-driven governance.
If all the value of the software is in its code and the code is freely available under OSS licenses, one can argue that this piece of code will be able to live on indefinitely serving the user's -- not the owner's or the company's -- best interest, in one form or another.
One interesting consequence of that is that, once a segment of software is appropriately served by some well-made piece of Open-Source Software, the abilities for companies to make a competing commercial product is killed-off.
After all, you can't compete with free and serving the user's best interests.