I do not want to go back and forth with that model/culture stuff. Let me focus on the key points.

There will always be a clash between intellectual property and the idea of open-source because of its very nature. Open source means show your code to other and they can not see how you did, x,y,z especially when you release documentation explaining all that stuff.

As for holding someone responsible. Open source is notoriously less secure than their proprietary counterparts. Just read on stack-smashing attacks. Open source software are really vulnerable to stack-smashing attacks. Companies also face security challenges but try to fix it asap because of their brand and because they have the budget to do so. Imaging an open-source software that is not well funded having to fix serious bugs.

I am not limiting the problem to creative/design space. You want more? Give me better alternatives to Tableau, MS Office, Visual studio, Cutting edge military and aviation software, GPT3, unity engine, autocad, Ansys simulation, etc. There is none. Softwares that are hard to build require a dedicated and well funded team of smart people. Open-source (github) is more of a hop-out and hop-in. While an open source project can have thousands of contributors, they can never be as productive as a small team of 30 people who are well funded in an organised company structure. Open source github model also suffers from a lot of communication bottle-neck.