This is just untrue. DRM has always existed on the web. Ten years ago it was Flash and Silverlight, two years ago companies would put proprietary blobs into browsers to play their shit (Chrome and Edge being the worst offenders) and now the W3C gave an standard that websites can interface with to apply DRM.
Is DRM bad? Yes. Did companies lobby inside the W3C to force the standard? Yes. Is it a better solution than proprietary extensions and NPAPI plugins? Also yes.
DRM only exists thanks to retarded US laws anyway, so the real culprit here is; surprise, companies being allowed to lobby in Congress.
DRM's Dead Canary: How We Just Lost the Web, What We Learned from It, and What We Need to Do Next
Alexander Bennett
Nolan Hill
...
Cameron Miller
Does it have any real practical value and is not another jewish maindwashing brain bubblegum if it has DRM applied on it?
All truly valuable information is distributed without restrictions and even free of charge.
Really makes you think.
Matthew Price
You know exactly what he is talking about you slippery kike. Stop pretending to be even dumber than you already are.
Leo Hill
Bashing Holla Forums again today Moshe? Even your dubs disagree with you.
Charles Scott
Like it was not the goal of the trip.
Evan Taylor
...
Luke Thomas
Being able to tardwrangle niggercattle is important for both us and the jews and all but is there even a single good or entertaining thing that you can do on an app with drm, or a website with drm?
Kayden Evans
Wew lad. You just went full SJW there.
Luis Scott
They are not forced to implement it.
I will use browsers which didn't implement it (or made it possible to rip it out at compile time), and if at some time the web is unusable without DRM, then fuck this shit, I'm out.
(btw, posting from Firefox EME-free edition)