> non-commercial licenses protect free software
No, they don't. Non-ommercial licenses make software broadly unusable by businessez, they don’t protect it. They typically exist to pritect the creators income from separating selling the aoftware as non-free (in even the gratis sense) for commercial users.
“No selling other software or services whose main component is the licensed software” licenses, which may be what you are thinking of, OTOH, of various forms (which are different than non-commercial licenses) protect the original software vendor from competition in selling their own software and services; they don't protect free (even gratis) software, but, like general non-commercial licenses and other proprietary licenses, thet protect the commercial interests of the software vendor.
> if being OSI or FSF compliant, means that businesses can use my work for free, then no thank you.
Sure, you are absolutely entitled under copyright law to choose a proprietary license that protects your commercial interests. When you do so, however, you aren’t entitled to the services of a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting Free (in the FSF sense) software to support your development and distribution of your non-Free software.
Kind of weird that you are so emphatic about not wanting other people to use your work for free and yet feel so entitled to other people making their work available to you for free even when your use directly opposes the purpose of their work.