@fsf talking with someone today had me seen him present an argument that if the term "free software" does not have any sort of legal definition, then a law (by the state perhaps) could potentially define it in another way and thus render our usage of "free as in freedom" illegal, thus the point that free does not mean "free as in beer" but "free as in free speech" cannot contend.
I find this very thought provoking. How should one think about this?