> But the claim is disingenuous when used as an argument against DRM. Deprived of the ability to use browser plugins, protected content distributors are not, in general, switching to unprotected media. Instead, they're switching away from the Web entirely. Want to send DRM-protected video to an iPhone? "There's an app for that." Native applications on iOS, Android, Windows Phone, and Windows 8, can all implement DRM, with some platforms, such as Android and Windows 8, even offering various APIs and features to assist this.

> In other words, the alternative to using DRM in browser plugins on the Web is not "abandoning DRM;" it's "abandoning the Web."

This shows a lack of understanding of what makes the web great. There's really no difference between a native app and a EME backed DRM layer. The web isn't about the browser window that it resides it; it's about content rendering the same on every platform. A page using EME is not going to render the same on every platform.

This is the status quo, with development costs being shifted from media companies (who no longer have to write separate apps for every platform they care about) to the platform owners who have to implement an approved DRM scheme or get their own scheme approved.