So I guess you agree that the profit motive isn’t necessary, because you moved to a completely unrelated point

1. If X is a necessary motive for Y, then in the absence of X, Y cannot happen.
2. Innovation can happen in the absence of a profit motive.
3. Therefore, the profit motive is not necessary for innovation.

If the profit motive is not the only motive that drives innovation, as you just agreed, then it isn’t necessary, logically. And not sure why you would then go on to expand the definition of profit into meaninglessness after agreeing there are other motives.