While I agree with most of your comment (and upvoted it), I'm not sure about this:

> While the Free part of FOSS is being substituted by “(just) open source” and “source available”,

Free software and open source are the same category of software and licenses (except for sporadic instances that are at the very edge of that one category, as categories tend to be blurred).

Software that is merely source available, of course, is not FLOSS by default. But I don't actually see free software being replaced by software which is just source available.

There are companies trying to push source available proprietary software as "open source", perhaps hoping for such replacement, and this has had some success in some specific areas, but the open source community is pushing against it. Or, at least, the wise ones in it are.