That definition is wrong, it implies that "free to use" also means "free to read/modify the code" and "resell it". By GNU definition, software like Opera isn't

That definition is wrong, it implies that "free to use" also means "free to read/modify the code" and "resell it". By GNU definition, software like Opera isn't free. Not even something as basic as (most) Windows drivers. It also completely ignores microtransactions (though of course those wouldn't really be an issue if the user had the source). Completely useless definition for this case. It works with "free" as in "freedom", not "free to use" (it's right on the 4th line). I'm sure the people who don't breathe without looking up what Stallman thinks about it will down-vote me to hell, but that won't make this definition more relevant for this.