Is it okay to clarify to a PhD interviewer about a question that I was hesitant to answer then, but am not now?
He is asking you why you need a PhD, he is not asking you why you want to sell your research. So, I think the focus of your response is misplaced; why does it have to be presented in a way that if you're not a CEO + PhD then you're a loser who will spend the life publishing shelf fillers?

Instead of comparing to (you + PhD + company) versus (other + PhD + no company), think (you + No PhD + company) versus (you + PhD + company.) 

There are dozens of way you can cast this decision positively without dissing the interviewers: 


The vigorous training in scientific thinking will enhance my credentials as a CEO.
I would love to work more closely with the R&amp;D so that I can better tailor my company's strategy.
I love to challenge myself, PhD is a great milestone, a trial for me to hone my grit.
I would love to see my research idea turned into a product that people would love, it's always been my dream.
There is a lack of research perspective in the current industry, I wish to change that.


Generally, try to project the difference between the normal you and a better you, not a better you and the inferior you. Some of the negative comments, as you said, may be hurtful even it's not targeted at anyone but yourself.