What everyone posting here needs to be aware of is that subverting DRM is considered -illegal- (anyone wonder why it's illegal to play DVDs using a FOSS player)?
Granted, it's easy to circumvent, and Apple has gone to great lengths project 'warm and fuzzy' to their restrictive policies. But it's still illegal.
Why should one have to do something considered illegal, just so they can play their iTunes music on the portable player of their choosing?
It should also be noted that Apple's DRM schemes are not limited to music and video. Any developer who's submitted an iPhone app to the iTunes store, and had it denied, can attest to this. I would cite references to this, but Apple has tacked on NDR's to their denial notices.
I've heard the argument time and time again that "you're only giving up a small portion of your rights." I've also heard "It's fun to use, and I don't have to think about it."
My question to these is how much are we willing to give up? What's the threshold? How long before bread and circuses are no longer sufficient?
(I could easily Godwin this thread right here, but I won't. You get the picture.)
Long story short, purchasing or using technology restricted with DRM only serves to validate DRM. If you validate, you also enable. If you enable, you suggest (even passively) that it could be applied further.
What you eventually see is a slow, calculated erosion of your rights, until there's nothing left. This is what DBD is all about.