I think you are spotting good contradictions! If we mean to abolish private property - that is, private ownership of the means of production - we must include productive software.
I don't see a big difference between "I built this widget making machine, while supported by the community, so it will be managed by the community," and "I wrote this widget making software, while supported by the community, so it will be managed by the community."
Part of this comes down to why you want to "own" the software. If it's to extract an income, why? In a society that has socialized production and no longer has scarcity, you don't need an income. I think there's interesting nuance around using software for purposes that you don't like, but that's no different from a machinist making tools.
Transitioning into this is pretty hard to dictate, and I think we shouldn't try to. The next steps from here are towards collective ownership - workers seizing software companies - and they can work out something equitable based on their local conditions.
(I also think your definition of libertarian socialism is not the same as mine: a libertarian socialist society to me is classless, stateless, and has abolished hierarchy)