It does rather feel like the shoe is on the other foot now. Go back a few decades and publishers were the ones rinsing bookshops for all they were worth. Two wrongs don't make a right of course...
There's nuance to this. A company can achieve power by giving customers a better experience and in that way insert itself between customer and the industry. Thus wielding power in the interest of the customer. A company can also achieve power by giving producers a better experience and insert themselves between producer and industry.
I think my point is that in the majority of cases companies will do both. i.e. (when run "effectively") they will use all available levers.
If they fail to, it will usually be an oversight than a deliberate strategy.
Of course - some companies push harder, overstep more bounds and neglect the possible negative 2nd order effects more. But assuming there's an obvious lever that says "make more money legally" - the vast number of companies will reach for it.
The real lesson is if you let a person or organisation get into a position where they can squeeze, they will squeeze. They won't even be doing it because they are "evil" because the hedonic treadmill makes everyone feel entitled to more. The problem is systemic. We know our failures but don't do anything about it.
If you were to list occasions where entities acted intentionally against their best interests then that would be more noteworthy!