It actually is legally Cognac. It's an odd exception to an an odd bit of protectionism.

Buy a Cognac distillery, move it a few km, operate it using the exact same people, methods, ingredients, etc. and, TA DA!, if you use the same noun to describe your product you are breaking the law. Of course you can always change the law to suit your protectionist needs (an example) .

Make absolute garbage in the right area and it can still (pardon the pun) the have same name (legally).

My personal view is that the really absurd protectionism is the ban on the use of terms like "type", "kind" , "style"; calling a brandy* made to Cognac-specs (minus the geography) "Cognac-style brandy" is illegal in many places. Comparing your product to similar, perhaps far inferior, products is illegal?

That's not protecting the integrety of the product; it's protecting the revenue of landowners from potentially superior (higher quality, lower cost, etc.) competitors (or, heaven forbid, UK-based slicers doing what Parma producers recommend; this one has me a bit confused.)

* why don't the Dutch go after those who usurp their term for burned wine?

\Needs some more burned wine.