He contradicts himself in the text:

#1: > So we put the user first, but different users have different preferences. Putting the user first doesn’t help us to satisfy users’ possibly incompatible wants: some Web users like to watch big-budget movies at home, some Web users like to experiment with code.

#2: > No one likes DRM as a user, wherever it crops up.

DRM never means putting users first - it's always anti user, for which #2 precisely attests. So, #1 had to read: "we put DRM lobby first". That sounds about right about what they did. And, DRM obviously goes way beyond just preventing tinkering with the code in its anti user nature.

So this principle is clearly violated: In case of conflict, consider users over authors over implementers over specifiers over theoretical purity. Users don't want DRM. Users want media. Publishers want DRM. Putting users over publishers means showing publishers the door, until they come back with DRM free content. Publishers will bend since DRM is idiocy and always was, W3C shouldn't bend.