I think being overly reasonable and keeping it simple is probably the right approach, so pointing out that a video is tied to a specific system and will likely stop working is preferable to stuff that heads in the direction of $15 purchases harming freedom.
People don't mind DRM on things like Netflix because the cost is so low and the model is clearly communicated in all of Netflix'x marketing.
In contrast, DRM inspires significant outrage when people are told that they “own” something but are restricted from using it normally. Even people who don't normally care about technical issues know it's not right when they're told e.g. they have to pay a second time to watch a movie on their iPad after paying $50 for a Blu-Ray copy.
If anything is going to change the DRM trend, it'll be increased unwillingness to pay high prices for restricted content.