Well... remember how Canonical in 2006 managed to scale "bigly"? Give a shiny polished Linux distro and delegate all fixes and user care to the unpaid "community". That was exploitation, and it happened in the Open-blah-blah-world. So yes, I think that the onus is the other way round: One needs to show that communal projects are not exploitatie in order for them not to count as something neo-liberal and capitalist. (The best example for neo-liberal capitalist exploitation in the Open-blah-blah world is still Wikipedia and Wikimedia and their exploitation of free labour in order to amass content that big tech companies can use for free in their fee-based products.)