Embrace DRM on Linux - No
Like many others Linux and Open Source shouldn't embrace DRM. DRM might be more acceptable if Facebook, Amazon and 99 sites and their bots were not violating user's privacy. Sorry about Netflix on Linux also but it's another example of proprietary software to protect Microsoft Windows. Like others I like NoCD and no Windows Live versions of my games, especially since I'm never play online.
DRM is a response that further blurs the copyright laws. I just watched a DVR'd Hist Channel episode that was preceded by a copyright message stating the only authorized copy of the show is to educators for instructional purposes until 2013. That makes everyone who DVR'd the program copyright infringers. What about printed and music material that makes it copyright 25yrs after the originator dies? Is xeroxing a newspaper article or cartoon, reading a leftover newspaper or magazine, reading a library book or viewing a library DVD copyright infringements?
Originally, copyright law protected the originator for about 25yrs, excepting non-profit copies or fair use. Its ridiculous in this age of digital media to cling to 1970s copyright laws. Reasonable copyright laws along the lines of the original intent with far shorter expiration dates, without transfer of copyrights would eliminate this perceived piracy and need for DRM.
DRM is like TAS measures at the airports, it costs airlines (but mostly travelers) lots of additional money to implement but doesn't improve flight safety anymore than before.
