You can't just label everything as "doing business" and then regulate it all. If I make something interesting and give everyone in the world the blueprints so they can make one themselves that's not "doing business".
bad analogies are bad
edit: Or if we go to the extreme of nothing except the action and potential for negative impact mattering then you'd need a license to give those cookies to your own kids or even yourself.
Much as I ardently support FOSS (and similar: open hardware, say) I also think this idea has some use and deserves substantial consideration.
It is difficult to draw the line here, much more difficult than it seems at first, in my personal opinion.
They're just using that as support for why they disagree with the EU rules, since it can be considered "commercial" even if you're making no money, just because someone is losing money.
That depends a lot on the circumstances. If a malicious, sophisticated, actor broke into your shop and poisoned your dough, which resulted in you selling poisonous cookies, should you be liable because your security systems weren't good enough to stop the poisoner?
I don't find the idea useful to anyone but the unscrupulous. I find it very easy to draw the line. If I design something and publish it and people find it useful and put it to use that's clearly not commerce, that's just creativity.
> commercial activity, whether in return for payment or free of charge
That definitely includes people like me who thought signing up for GitHub Sponsors was a good idea. What's the worst that could happen, right? For all I know it could include projects that accept donations too. Is writing a book about the project or offering screencasts or whatever the same as offering "technical support services"? Is building a community on GitHub or Discord or whatever "providing a software platform through which the manufacturer monetises other services"? Who knows? I'm not a lawyer.
MS give away a browser with their OS, that's still business activity but not directly commerce, IMO.
Now, you say "but I'm not doing that", however the law needs to account for those who would use the freedom to create something and give it away in order to manipulate the market. It happens.
So in my opinion, whilst I absolutely want to ensure FOSS projects can operate, I also want to ensure large companies can't simply release a product as OSS destroy the market and once captured then only update their commercial offerings, for example. So, it needs a bit of thought.