Yeah, I might be parroting a bad opinion I got from someone else. You are correct in what you're saying.

The law making legal distinction is to prevent companies from claiming their drinks are something they're not and like you said Bourbon has to come from Kentucky despite Jack Daniel's being pretty much being identical to Bourbon.

If new whiskey companies were allowed to label any copper coloured straight whiskey made from corn "Bourbon" then the meaning behind the "bourbon" distinction is lost.

Scotch whisky is specifically about how and where the whisky is made. If you label something that isn't scotch "scotch" then you're effectively lying about the product and there are many companies that would seek to profit off such confusion.

I think it makes more sense if I made a "Bourbon" in Scotland and then tried to sell it as a Tennessee whisky. It's clear what the problem is with such a thing since the original meaning behind the words has lost its meaning and only serves to confuse the consumer.