I think you're missing the point. They are not the same when the rules specifically tell us they are not the same.
Otherwise you can't claim you are arguing from RAW.
Let me include the part you left you: I don't have an issue with your interpretation. I have an issue with you claiming it to be the rules as written.And that's an entirely valid reading of "protected." But not the only one.
So yes, there are interpretations. If someone says "this is my interpretation" I'm okay with that. It's when someone says "this is RAW" and it's nowhere to be found in the RAW that I take issue.