I commented on AriJ's blog, but I'll put in my 0.02 euros here.

DRM *could* be USED fairly - i.e. a proper statement by the media author/publishers of how the DRM affects the customer, so that the customer can make an informed decision to accept the product or not.

DRM *could* be IMPLEMENTED fairly - i.e. so that the media data was protected or watermarked without impeding the customer's fair use, and using a standards based codec or open source playback software.. e.g. encrypt the data using a published/standard algorithm so that the consumer can back up the data and also back up the encryption keys. That would mean the consumer would NOT lose access to the media if they changed device (upgraded, replaced after breaking etc), nor could the publisher arbitrarily revoke access to the rightfully-paid-for media. Since the media data was keyed to an individual, that person would want to take care to not leak copies to the world!

So far all DRM schemes in real world use fail the above tests, many are astoundingly unreasonable! Worst of all, many consumers do not understand the situation - I am amazed Sony survived their various exploits with root kits etc, personally I will never touch another of their products. I see the situation as a time bomb waiting to go off!

sorry for the long rant.