Imagine Pepsi selling a drink called "not Coca Cola" or Google advertising "not ChatGPT" or "not Outlook". Literally the only purpose is customer confusion and piggy-backing on a successful brand to save on marketing.
In general I don't quite understand the "meat-envy" displayed by many vegans. As if there aren't tons of extremely delicious "vegan-original" foods (fried tofu, falafel, rice bowl with mushrooms & avocado, ...).
A better comparison would be "Not Cola", which AFAIK would be an acceptable name for a drink. See literally all smaller Cola brands which include the word "Cola" in their name.
The purpose of a “brand” is to reduce confusion. So that customers know what they’re buying.
So I don’t want to buy “an artificially manufactured food in the category of milk”, I want to buy milk.
Have you ever bought goats milk by mistake ?
From a marketing perspective saying something is a "milk alternative" or whatever is mostly to market to non-vegans so that they know what to buy if they're looking to get into that area. [Shaky unverifiable source - I know somebody who develops these products for large companies]
If you'd allow stuff like "milk alternative", you'd quickly get "<huge>MILK</huge><tiny color=unreadable>alternative</tiny>".
Not making a judgement either way. Personally, I feel these alternatives work in the same place as milk (coffee, cereal, et cetera), but are nutritionally very different from milk so I can appreciate both sides of this argument.
Additionally, there are a lot of examples where the term milk is used to describe a non-dairy product. E.g. coconut milk.
This is nowhere nearly as clear cut as you portray it.
Because many vegans were meat eaters earlier in life. So they sometimes crave a tasty burger or sausage or salami, or a cheese-based dish for the same reason you do: they grew up eating those foods and learned to like them.
In general I don't understand the desire to insert a comment of this kind into every discussion about vegetarian/vegan foods.
That people might be vegetarian but also like the taste of meat seems such an obvious reason I don't understand why it doesn't occur to people.
There is also no "meat envy". But you might like a dish called 'chicken tikka' and no longer eat chicken. Or you might be a meat eater unfamiliar with vegan products but want to cook for your son-in-law something similar as to what you cook for the rest of the family. Why should you not be able to buy a product called 'fake chicken' to be use as an alternative ingredient.
As long as the advertisement is not misreading (claiming in big letters 'chicken fingers' but actually in small script adding 'not made of chicken') there is literally no reason to prohibit such convenience labeling and naming schemes.