DRM isn't preventing people from pirating the works, it just makes life harder for paying customers and potentially presenting a security hole to them as well.

I don't disagree; the piracy firehose is already on and this is all a moot point. But if you want the distributors to play ball with web standards instead of sticking to Flash, you have to address their concerns.

Is DRM really inevitable for streaming video ? I can listen to my music as much as I want, unrestricted, without DRM, through deezer. And that's a premium service. They seem to be doing just fine.

Besides, spotify uses flash for their webplayer, probably for DRM as well. Yet there exists an open source spotify client, despotify, that probably would make it very easy to download the music as MP3.

In the end, DRM just means making your client's life a pain.

Deezer uses DRM. they mention it right in their developer API terms of use: http://developers.deezer.com/termsofuse

What do you mean, without DRM? Does Deezer provide you with mp3 files to put on your devices (ipod shuffle or similar)? Can you send a file to a friend? Or does Deezer forces you to be online and/or use Deezer's own app to listen to your music?

There are a lot of ways to engineer DRM in a system, I think you just don't see that you're actually using a DRMed system to play your music.

DRM will not make it possible to rent any movie for streaming. Most of the recent and blockbusters one certainly but any is not gonna happen. Only way to get any movie is through file sharing from people, it's not legal everywhere yet but at some point a global license will come to be.