You say DRM strategies are stupid, ridiculous, and don't make sense. You demand no prisons, and no limits on the consumption of digital media.
However I haven't seen any explicit statement about whether DRM would still be bad if the strategies COULD work. You don't seem to say anything about whether the pervasiveness of piracy or the ease of creating unauthorized reproductions are good things.
You talk so much about the status quo for what is possible, but I don't see any explicit statement about rights. Why is that? Won't you say whether the original producers of a piece of digital media have any right to dictate who consumes it? Won't you say whether the consumers of a piece of digital media have every possible right to reproduce it and redistribute the reproductions? Are you even capable of giving a normative justification for a value-for-value paradigm?