Don’t I? I would be happy to compare credentials w/r logical fallacies.
What, starting with “appeal to authority?” 
Here’s how I see it:
Someone commits the etymological fallacy if they say “The English plural of ‘octopus’ is ‘octopodes’ not ‘octopi,’ because that is the correct way to do plurals in ancient Greek from which we get the word.” (Because they are conflating usage in a different context, here an ancient language, with the meaning at hand.)
So someone would likewise commit the etymological fallacy by saying “You can’t call the stuff in pictured with the fresh Thai basil above ‘(vegan) buffalo mozzarella’ because in Italian mozzarella di bufala is a protected designation of origin term.” (Because they are conflating usage in a different context, here a PDO, with the meaning at hand.)
However, one would also commit the etymological fallacy by saying “The English plural of ‘octopus’ is ‘octopodes’ not ‘octopuses,’ because contemporary English usage accepts ‘octopodes’.” (I.e. it’s true that “octopodes” is acceptable, but it is also true that ‘octopuses’ (and ‘octopi’) is acceptable in contemporary English usage. One usage does not forbid the other.)
In the same way, one also commits the etymological fallacy by saying “You can’t call the stuff in pictured with the fresh Thai basil above ‘(vegan) buffalo mozzarella’ because contemporary English usage accepts ‘buffalo mozzarella’ as dairy mozzarella made from Italian water buffalo milk.” (I.e., while true, it is also true that ‘vegan buffalo mozzarella’ is also used in a variety of media, including in commercially available cookbooks. One usage does not forbid the other.)
