the one reference definition of free software is maintained jointly by the FSF and the GNU project. Stallman's opinion matters for both.

there are other definitions based on it, but they aim for equivalence.

you seem to be arguing that software can be free while failing to respect the most basic of the four freedoms, so essential that it used to be taken for granted, thus #0.

software freedom is a well-defined concept. the freedom to come up with alternate definitions that suit your mistaken notions is not one of the four essential freedoms, and it's not part of the established meaning of the term. you might as well be fighting a dictionary definition.