(Going against my better judgement and weighing in on this thread.)

I don't think that DRM is the issue here.

I think that publishers have been doing a very poor job of winning over consumers. A lot of people see ebooks as being as expensive as print books, very low quality, and having too many restrictions. While these restrictions may be implemented through DRM, that doesn't mean that DRM must be restrictive. (For example: publishers can focus upon using 'watermarks' to identify the source of pirated books and place minimal restrictions upon how you read the book.)

Even though I think a lot of these problems have been created by publishers (many of whom would be gleeful if the used market and libraries died), they also have to figure out how to deal with the quirks of the digital age. This is stuff like: lending a book used to mean giving someone your copy. Now lending a book means making someone a copy. Even things like text-to-speech is a new idea for publishers, because audio books used to be a separate revenue stream to publishers and no one really questioned it.

So I don't think that it's a black and white issue. I think that publishers have problems to iron out with DRM (though not necessarily to eliminate it). I think that readers have to accept that publishers are businesses who need to make money. And I also think that everyone has to come to terms with what copyright means in an age where the simple act of opening a book makes a copy, never mind how sharing our stuff has changed.