To put it simply, DRM highly inconveniences and disrespects legal owners in one way or another (needs online connection; installs unwanted & unneeded software just to support the DRM; wants to send someone my installation history or other privacy-intrusive crap; etc.), while pirates get "cracked" versions of the whatever that do not have those same inconveniences and disrespects.

Same as my DVD's and blurays - where I am "forced" to wait thru the "DO NOT PIRATE" screens (and often the previews and ads also), while pirates have dl'd versions that don't have that crap on them (or are easily passed-by simply by fast-forwarding).

Fuck DRM

The most important. We hate DRM, because it is one of the first and biggest, actual causes and/or real or fabricated excuses, for piracy!

* they tell me I'm buying a product, but what I'm really buying is access to a game - in other words a service
* I sometimes play games on my laptop as well, and DRM limits the access to "my" games
* I worry about the future access to my DRM games because internet connections are not the same everywhere
* the intellectual idea that access to my paid-for games is conditional...like some leash
* that I should indirectly be held responsible for people who pirate games...which is why we have DRM to begin with

Yes, to all of the above, these are also my reasons for despising DRM in any form.

What tops it all, is that pirates get a better experience in the end than legitimate customers if DRM is applied.

That's so wrong.

Fuck DRM.

It's an arbitrary restriction on my freedom to use, carry and store my purchase that doesn't justify its presence with any kind of necessity to operate the product in a way that I want.

Steam games require that I be connected to the internet to play/install single-player and adds achievements that I care nothing about to compensate me.

Similarly, iTunes restrict movie accesses to my iTune app (no iTunes movies on my Linux partition or my Surface Tablet) and in exchanges adds a client that I can do without.

EDIT:

I should also add the fact that I find it a flawed model.

You sell me a game as a commodity for a fixed price and then treat it like a service: iTunes need to keep their client up to date and port it to future versions of the platform I use for me to watch movies on their client. Steam need to keep their server up and running well.

How can you justify this continuous expense in the long term with fixed one-time income? You can't, it's disguised rental hidden behind a bit up front payment and they'll treat it as such in the end. They don't intent to honor the "commodity" illusion unless they sell a constant stream of products that make the service costs negligible in comparison to their income.

I can understand better how a service like Netflix can run sustainably in the long run and I find their lower continuous payment method both fairer to the customer and well adapted to what it provides.

Paradigm of DRM:

a guy has an idea, that is his own (IP)
then create a source code, that it's own property (but different from the idea)
from that code create a binary, that he owns
then milions of copy of this binary are done, but sells only licenses (not the binary nor the source)
the binary to work use a DRM that is owned by someone else, of which the game creator has only a license to use, that (I suppose) is passed to the final customer
the final customer ends up with ... something, that wasn't really sold to him (since he was sold a license) that runs thanks to something else that is owned by someone else of what, perhaps, you don't have right of making a backup copy.

Most people don't seem to understand why DRM is wrong, or what is a DRM-system's real purpose.
First of all DRM is not for protecting the "starving" artists rights, nor is it for keeping them from starving, only really dumb people can believe that. DRM is for protecting rich people, and making sure they can get richer every year. The entertainment industry is the perfect place to get the most money with the least work, especially when customers are getting more and more dumb, therefore less choosy every year.
DRM is not for making sure only a legally bought software can be used, not any more, not since big corporations own most of the industry. DRM is for understanding customer habits, and through that, controlling the market.
Make no mistake, I'm not talking about any kind of conspiracy theory, it is simply about profit! Think of it this way: if I want to sell something, I want to get the most profit with the less investment. The dumber and the less picky my customer is, the more easier it is for me to convince him to buy my product, the better, so I produce more profit.
DRM is also for getting used people to the fact that they are being watched. It forces people into buying games on specific channels, which are transparent for the trader, making it easier to figure out customer habits, at the expense of privacy.

everyone needs something to hate