More for concerned citizens.
There is a difference between add-on code for particular proprietary content platforms, and writing DRM support into the web standard. Not implementing a Flash plugin doesn't break compliance with the 'official' browser standards - not bunging in the EME stuff will, presuming it gets fully adopted.
That, as I understand it, is the real point of controversy in this whole thing - whether DRM belongs in web standards. Mozilla was fighting it, uniquely among major browser vendors so far as I know; this move means that they've basically given in.
Whether they are right or wrong to do so is another matter.
When I click play on a movie in Chrome, I don't know (or care) whether it's using Chrome's embedded Flash or an "open" HTML5 video tag or some crazy proprietary thing. I only care when it doesn't work.
Are not the hundreds of people who responded to this thread citizens of somewhere or other?
Are they not concerned?
It's a W3C standard, for one. Whereas Flash/Silverlight are completely third-party, EME can be argued to be "browser-endorsed" or "web standards-endorsed" to a degree.