Relax...its just a term that every Canon user is very familiar with...historical definition does not matter if enough people use a word or term in a certain context to the point that everyone else understands its meaning (i.e. the word drone used to cause English majors to go into meltdown but now it is universally accepted as a term for a UAV/UAS). And yes, even based on your definition I do think it is more appropriate than ever; Canon's DSLR line has been crippled in the video department to the point to where they were no longer in the battle for consumers. The 5DIV wasn't "built to a budget" yet it has a terrible crop and it uses MJPEG for 4K, that to me is crippled; or neglecting to add 24FPS to the EOS 90D, RP, and M6 II...until enough people complained and they added it, or neglecting to add two card slots to the EOS R, or no 10 bit codec even for an external recorder for the C200, the list goes on and on.PLEASE stop using that word! It's patently gross but also wildly inaccurate. It implies 'cannot do very much at all'. If a ship is "crippled" during a battle, it's essentially out of the fight. 'Not being able to do everything because it's built to a budget' is nothing like that.
These missing features aren't about building a camera to a budget, they are about deliberately removing features to protect some other model in the line; the end result typically being to drive customers to other vendors who did not make those choices. As a reference point Panasonic throws everything but the kitchen sink at their cameras and squeeze everything they can out of every piece of hardware in the camera...I've never seen anyone saying they got a crippled GH5, or S1H; because everyone knows the only limitations are the hardware.
Their recent mirrorless choices on the other hand make perfect sense and aligns the actual hardware with that price segment. The RP, R6, and R5 IMO fit perfectly in the lineup and have actual hardware differences which clearly differentiate the features and capabilities of each camera. From the specs that have been released so far, I haven't seen anything that indicates Canon is deliberately using software/firmware to "cripple" the hardware capabilities of the cameras.
To me, the difference in building to a budget vs crippling a camera comes down to hardware....if Canon deliberately removes software features that the hardware can support then they have crippled the camera. If they remove software features due to hardware limitations that's called building to a budget.