I see it more like a padlock
I do see your desctinction between implementations.
Putting the padlock on the inside of the cage keeps you out of my space. Putting the padlock on the outside of the cage keeps me in your space. The padlock mechanism hasn't changed, only it's intended purpose.
An argument can actually be made for OpenPGP; it restricts who can read my document or email communication. Is it magically not OpenPGP if someone writes a program that includes or fetches the key from a server blocking me from running a program add-on until validated by PGP decryption? I agree that the intent of OpenPGP in protecting the user is indeed noble and destinguishes it from similar mechansims inteded to restrict permissions granted by copyright.
A PS3 program validated against a certificate value versus a Debian package validated against a certificate value; the only difference is intent to hinder running the software veruses warn the user but I don't see a difference in the mechanism use.
I don't suggest bluring the lines to the point of "these two things include the addition of numbers so therefore, they are the same".
From the business perspective, DRM is security software though. They believe they are securing access to there content by limiting the end user through a restrictive mechanism. It doesn't make it right or particularily successful given that it really only limits law abiding users.
(Looking forward to your article too by the way. Hopefully the discourse adds to it rather than covering the points ahead of time.)
