Part of why DRM has always been so dodgy, compared to cryptography, is that it’s a really an attempt at a weird sort of conditional secret keeping:
Not disclosing something to someone is comparatively easy; attempting to disclose it to them such that it’s transparent if they just play it back once; but utterly refuses to be dumped to their hard drive; or can only be replayed X times, or expires in 18 months, or whatnot is harder.
It’s not some fundamentally new thing; people have been disclosing sensitive information under the implicit or explicit condition that it be used only for specific purposes; and not for others, for who knows how long; but it’s easily the most audacious attempt to extend “I’ve told you this in confidence” to a large audience of people you have only a commercial relationship with and minimal social influence or direct control over.
I suspect that any recognizably human society will continue to have its share of secrets and disclosures-in-confidence; and some people will probably be willing to be pretty drastic in their attempts to maintain them; or punish those who threaten or violate them. However, without the ability to engage in low-friction economic interactions with large numbers of people you have basically no other ties to; it’s hard to see DRM being the tool of choice; rather than the historical classics like appeals to loyalty and threats of violent death.
