Digital services are different than physical services.
Digital games are "rented" in a sense, as you cannot own any of the software. You own the right to USE the software as often as you'd like, with limitations (usually it's limited to one account or one console, or maybe just so long as you pay a monthly fee, varies based on the wishes of the company).
Physical games you own the physical medium the software comes on, so you "own" the disc. The code is still the company's property. When you remove that aspect of owning something physical, as what happens when you buy digital, all that's left is the code. So you basically purchase the right to use it. In both physical and digital, you do not purchase the right to use the actual code as you want. So, if they wanted to, they can invalidate your right to use the software/code for a variety of reasons (this has happened before a few times).
So basically, physical is physical+digital, and companies can't bust down your door and steal back anything physical just because their digital stuff is in it. But they can if it's just digital since the protections inherent with physical property don't exist. which could be seen as you not really owning the digital copy. It's...well, it's weird. but that's what it is. And consoles are slightly different, as there is additional physicality (the hardware) to deal with, but that's a different conversation.
This is the current state of copyright in the United States (and isn't absolute, there are exceptions and accommodations). I'm not sure where other countries stand, but it'll be somewhat similar in most places.
This court case is interesting, but I don't think it directly applies to ownership and copyright of video games and software.