The W3C's plan for DRM in HTML5 is a betrayal for all web users
Consumers don't care about implementation, they only care about the content, and until they do, suppliers of content hold all the cards.<p>There is nothing to be won by resisting hooks for DRM in the browser however appealing it seems to take a principled stand. The content suppliers will gleefully go with native apps, flash, silverlight, even Emscripten-cross-compiled codecs. With content consumption going mobile, the push for native apps is even stronger.<p>Really, all you'll do by resisting this, is teach the majority of consumers who don't know any better that the Web sucks, and all of the enjoyable things they want are to be found on iOS or other proprietary locked down distribution platforms. That if you want apps that deliver the stuff you are interested in, you have to look outside the web.<p>Back when Chrome proposed dropping H264 support, I was infuriated, even though I fully support WebM as the mandatory to implement codec. I don't think "purity" really serves the platform, flexibility does, and the best way to register you don't like DRM is to simply stop consuming any and all media which uses it. Not just Web media, but <i>all</i> media that's DRMed.<p>A DRM free HTML5 spec is not going to force Hollywood to allow you to play Games of Thrones on your open source Linux browser.