It's MIT and Apache dual licensed. If the company fails, you fork and move on. If the company never makes a dime, that's OK for me: some folks got paid to make open source tooling.
I agree that we have no idea how it'll play out. But I've seen nothing but good faith from Charlie and others, and I see no reason to preemptively condemn their attempt to build a business.
In this case they are replacing Python code with Rust which might exclude large part of Python community from being able to contribute.
(Or another framing: only the tiniest fraction of the Python community was contributing to CQA tooling in the first place. It's not clear that prioritizing the interests of the 99.9% of Python programmers who -- rightfully! -- will never modify these tools makes sense.)
I'm not sure what the maker of that video wants, does he want money to be poured back into the community, or for no one else to make money?