Digital Rights Management, from now on referred to as DRM, is a very broad classification when it comes down to it. It exists seemingly to be the foil to Free Software, as it is any technique or implementation that limits freedom of use of the desired software on the basis of rights. Overall, we are of the opinion that while DRM is not necessarily a blight on the Internet and its denizens, its implementation has been disastrous in many cases thus far.
There is a simple negative affect that results from poor DRM implementation that we believe to be so powerful that its existence is enough to condemn the current state of this misguided attempt to keep rights sacred. This consequence is that in far too many cases, the legal consumer or owner of a piece of software is wrongly jilted out of being able to use their own product, all because of DRM. There is a history of this with Apple's downloaded iTunes music between multiple devices, and while there are plenty more instances, I want to focus on the most egregious offenses: those of video games with what developers call always-on DRM.
To set the stage, for many years now, gaming has had two primary spheres of operation: online and offline. Online, gamers can play competitively and cooperatively, or otherwise just coexist in a large, shared playspace. Alternatively, single-player or locally multiplayer games can be played offline without any worry of Internet connection or server functionality. I want to stress that this latter option is the only> option for many players, as some may not have access to a strong and stable Internet connection. Maybe they just want to play in solitude. Either way, always-on DRM requires that players be connected, at all times, as a means of securing their rights to the game. It shouldn't be hard to see how this immediately goes awry and alienates a huge portion of the player base. After paying for content, players should not have to be at the mercy of their Internet connection. Highly anticipated titles such as Diablo 3 and the most recent Sim City were met with great hostility by fans when they were released, chiefly due to the fact that these were single-player franchises that now required the player to be connected to play at all, even if they had purchased the full game.
DRM of this kind is disgraceful towards consumers, and ultimately reeks of corporate greed. Developers have found more clever ways to fight piracy in the past. For example, both Dark Souls and Serious Sam 3 included code that would summon relentless, invincible enemies into the pirated copies of their games, essentially ruining the experience. This may sit towards the opposite end of the spectrum, but I view it as the pinnacle of clever anti-piracy measures.
Granted, these issues are all of great relevance to me, so that may be influencing my negative position on DRM. Regardless, there is nothing okay about legitimate customers being heavily inconvenienced, if not outright betrayed due to a ham-fisted attempt at getting rid of piracy. In my opinion, the real way towards stopping piracy is making legal options attractive rather than attempting to lock the whole thing down. There is a solution out there, but it is not this.