I wish Cory would explain how DRM is different than ARM (analog rights management). When I read his article I wonder, why is it that no one should mind that a movie theater has walls to keep out non-paying customers or a printed book limits the number of readers to one at a time. I don't feel that the Movie theater owner or the publisher is treating me as the enemy. He might answer, well digital copies cost nothing so they are different. But would he think filming inside a movie theater would be legit? Afterall I'm not costing the theater owner anything by filming, and my distribution of my copies would be free.
On the other hand DRM lets them make it really convenient for me. I dont need to go to the theater for see the film, I can invite the theater with it's walls inside my home for a brief visit. I don't surrender anything. I'm gaining something I could not otherwise have. it also lets them sell me the product cheaper and earlier. the alternative would be to wait for the DVD and pay more to own it like a book.
Now I think there are times the DRM people take it too far. THe sony root kit was not a temprorary visit. It left the walls behind and stole something from me. So yes DRM can be evil. But so can many nasty forms of ARM. FOr example NDA and employment contracts that prevent a former employee from freely working for a competitor. So it's not the rights management that is the flaw, or the digital ness. It's just some cases are onerous.
If cory has an argument then he needs to explain why he opposes all rights management not just DRM. He's a succesful author who found that he can make money selling Paper rights management.