For those who don't know what DRM is, it stands for digital rights management. What it was supposed to do was allow companies to enforce copyrights. What it did was make it a nightmare for people to backup their libraries and in one instance installed a root-kit, which is a tool often used by hackers to screw with other people's computers undetected. Which brings up the current controversy between Android, Netflicks, and Hollywood.
If you haven't read the articles yet, do it now.
The thing is Hollywood, rightfully, is worried about piracy, but is getting dangerously close to where Sony was five years ago. The reason Android doesn't have a Netflicks app is because the platform is too open. This brings up some interesting questions about the future of open platforms, such as linux and Android. By closing platforms are we trading freedom for security, and getting neither? Linux has a reputation of security, it's open nature allows security holes to be found very quickly by the community and patched just as quickly. Windows is a close platform and several iterations have become notorious for their security holes. The Mac OS is another closed platform that was believed by many to be "secure," but has become increasingly targeted as Apple computers become more popular.
In short, I guess I'm asking if this seems like a case of giving up real liberty in exchange for illusionary security.