The company gets to prevent future thefts, they've most likely written off the loss already (they're not going to reuse those goods as new items at v. least), they can get PR and more "column inches" on a new story about buyers helping them and then getting gifted the device.
I take issue with the fact that the company has any say in the matter at all, tbh. I dislike devices that phone home and can be disabled remotely as a matter of principle.
But you're right, in the end they are stolen goods.
> I take issue with the fact that the company has any say in the matter at all, tbh.
What? How does that make any sense. Someone stole their property, it's still theirs, of course they have a say in what happens to it. "Finders Keepers" is not how the world works...
If you buy stolen good, you don't get to keep them. These are stolen goods, why would you ever expect the company to simply allow you to use it?