I think one of the problems with the catchy "anti-DRM" movement has always been its emphasis on there being no place for such protections. There are people that would be against any form of DRM, but I suspect the reality is that most people are simply against the current obstructive implementations (though it makes for a less catchy protest chant
). It's a distinction that is rarely bothered with, and yet usually central to the argument of most of those that see a place for the existence of some form of DRM. It will be interesting to see how this new approach to DRM fairs in the longer term (how many take it up, how effective it proves and so on).