We're concerned about DRM because what it does accomplish. DRM creates a vertically-integrated market wherein every layer of the stack is authoritatively controlled by a colluding oligopoly of vertically integrated hardware+media corporations (Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Comcast, etc.)
The greatest problem with DRM is drivers. NVIDIA hardware only works well in Linux because it's important to NVIDIA's business. Even so, there are longstanding issues that would have been fixed decades ago if kernel devs were allowed to collaborate. Instead, DRM (and copyright in general) demands that the driver dev team be siloed away from the kernel devs. This way, NVIDIA can use the exclusivity of its CUDA implementation as an anticompetitive advantage in its hardware business.
Copyright is, fundamentally, a wall between would-be collaborators. DRM is an implementation of that wall, but instead of isolating people, it isolates software. The wall DRM provides is not used to monopolize the distribution of content: it is used to construct moats in our software ecosystem.
There's a reason I prefer the experience of torrenting a Netflix rip over streaming Netflix on my Roku: the entire hardware+software stack is superior. I can actually sort and navigate my library. I can decode&render with my faster GPU. I can adjust the audio delay. I can adjust subtitle placement & font. I can mix the audio so that dialogue is actually audible. I can do frame interpolation with SVP (again using a better GPU than whatever your "smart" TV has onboard). I can seek forward&backward quickly without changing bitrate. I can let the credits play without being interrupted by an ad. The list goes on...
I don't want a goddamn CRT. I want modern hardware. The more we let corporations abuse us with DRM, the less compatible that hardware will be with real software.
