You really love making excuses for this and keep "missing" the whole point.
This is a video card, this is supposed to simply work on any PC with a compatible slot and down the line, there will be people getting their hands on these via Ebay or whatever and they will be WTF when it doesnt work.
Worse, as I said, if Intel is allowed to this, then AMD have very good reasons to do the same with their line of GPU's.
In the end, we the customers will lose.
I don't feel like I'm making any excuses for anyone, but I'm absolutely aware of your point - I simply don't agree with it. Would I prefer Intel to wholesale release the product? Sure, if for nothing more than professional curiosity, but there's nothing special about the product that a budget GPU from AMD or Nvidia couldn't be a suitable alternative. Had it been an RTX 3090 competitor, and not a basic laptop-esque GPU, then it would be a different matter, but again, there are plenty of alternatives.
Even if Intel chooses to release all its future Xe graphics cards in this manner (which they won't, if they plan on recuperating the R&D costs), the consumer isn't losing out, simply because there are other options to purchase. But let's suppose for a moment that this does happen, that Intel launches the high-end Xe models with host controllers that require a specific BIOS for Intel PCHs.
The first people to complain aren't going to be the end consumers - it will be the 3rd party vendors. They will be the ones who won't want to design and manufacture relatively low volume selling products that only work on specific machines. Even if a few agree to do so, thanks to an arranged deal with Intel (as is the case here), they're going to sell a much smaller volume than their comparative AMD/Nvidia models. Once again, it's Intel that will lose out here, not the consumer, who will just buy an AMD or Nvidia graphics card.
On the point of it something only working on very specific CPU+PCH combinations, the DG1 isn't the first Intel product to be like this - Optane Memory/Accelerator is a good example. There's nothing unique about it that couldn't be achieved with a NAND flash SSD, but nobody has been calling for lawyers to get involved.
And it's not just Intel: AMD only offers resizable BAR support for Windows-based PCs with Ryzen 5000, 500 chipsets and Radeon 6000 systems, despite it being a core function of PCI Express. Have a Radeon RX 6800 XT but in a Ryzen 5 3600 setup? You're out of luck. Are they being short changed? To a certain degree, yes, but is it anti-consumer? AMD obviously don't think so and given the lack of lawsuits being raised over the matter, it would seem that non-Ryzen 5000+500 chipsets users with Radeon RX 6000 cards don't think so too - or they may do so, but don't feel that it's a big deal in any way.
I ultimately don't agree with your point, because Intel isn't selling the Iris Xe DG1 as a wholesale graphics card to the general public. If some end up on eBay (and I have no doubt many will), then some people are going to be disappointed, if they're not aware of its restrictions. But then if the sellers aren't making this clear, then the buyers should be eligible for a refund via eBay's policies, as the product has been evidently mis-sold.
But if Intel does sell its other products in the Xe line to the open market in this manner (limited to specific Intel-only CPU+PCH combinations), then I would partially agree with the point you're making - I wouldn't class it as being anti-consumer, just a really stupid business decision, and thus Intel would deserve as much criticism and complaints as possible.
