One need to look at it from the perspective of property ownership rather than inherent ability of the device. If someone has bought a device, at that point they should be in control of the property. If the manufacturer can exert control which you don't have, then they are de facto owners of the device after sale.

Its the difference between me selling you a computer you own and control, and giving you a user account while retaining root control for myself. The first is a sale and transfer of ownership, and the other is me renting out cloud access. From a perspective of rights, liberty, autonomy, control, and privacy, a toaster and a TiVo is two completely different kind of devices. One is your property which you control, and the other is someones else device which you have bought permission to use.

Last, let me clarify with an example. Let say I rent you a coffee machine on indefinite period of time, on the condition that you pay me $1 per cup. Simple concept, common practices in many offices, and it is easy to understand who the property owner of the device. Now lets change the setup by actually selling the device to you, but where DRM restricts the device so only my coffee is permitted, which just happens to add an extra cost of 1$ per cup compared to other brands. Has anything actually changed?