> users brought DRM on themselves, when they started pirating stuff.
I don't agree with that in the slightest.
Copyright infringement (what you call "piracy") has another word: sharing. In
Kindergarten, we're taught rightly that sharing is good. Then, publishers
compare this good, normal act to attacking ships.
Sharing is natural for us. Without sharing, society as we know it could not
have existed. What we were taught in Kindergarten is correct: sharing is
good, and this is true whether it affects someone's outdated business model
or not.
Other than that, DRM didn't arise exclusively to stop unauthorized sharing.
That's been the biggest reason, but there have been others. The Nintendo
Entertainment System, for example, contained a chip whose purpose was to
cause the NES to refuse to function if "unlicensed" games were put into the
system. This was in fact an effort to restrict publishers so they could
charge fees and control the process, not to prevent unauthorized copying.
