There are other models. Lots of OSS has existed for decades without compromising on any freedoms, including pricing. And will continue to exist for decades/centuries more. Most of it just continues to thrive on individual and (usually) corporate sponsored work.
The only issue is with corporate entities struggling to turn OSS into exploitable monopolies and control points. That's just not how OSS works. Companies that try to get creative with license restrictions, simply end up destroying their OSS communities. Community is conditional on the ability to actually use the resulting software and receiving a license to do so. That's what OSS is. People/companies contribute for free on the condition that the resulting software is free for them and others to use. It's a simple deal. You break it, people walk away. Your share holders are not our problem; but your problem.
Nothing wrong with closed source where you sell a license. If that's what you want to do as a company, that's what you do. And then people either buy it or not. Most of us are probably involved with some for-profit software company. I know I am.
The issue with Libreoffice is that it is open source and third parties can undercut the price set by the Document Foundation. by simply releasing it themselves.
Oracle found out the hard way that trying to "own" OSS doesn't work with Java, Mysql, Hudson, Open Office and a few other things they got out of the Sun acquisition. Other companies just took the source code and rolled their own builds and started distributing them. In the case of some of these products, Oracle used the trademark to insist on controlling distribution and actual forks and renames happened instead. Oracle lost control over the projects they inherited.
But for better or for worse, OpenJDK can be gotten from several sources and Oracle has largely given up trying to monetize distribution (you can still pay them for a Oracle produced build if you insist, but few people do), Jenkins continues to thrive, MariaDB and other databases are doing great, and indeed Libre Office is shipping as part of several linux distributions as the surviving & more successful fork of Open Office (which still exists as an Apache Project).
Good open source tends to survive the corporate entities it comes from. Sun Microsystems is long gone and absorbed into Oracle. But we still have the source code. And kudos to them creating/acquiring all the wonderful software I mentioned in this comment. They failed as a company but their software legacy is still powering our industry today. That's how good OSS works.
So the Document Foundation is well within their rights to try to charge for the software they steward but don't own. You can always build and distribute your own builds. For free. That's what the license says. Nobody is under any obligation to actually hand over their cash. They seem to have an existential problem in terms of their financing.