Your view that DRM is required to produce a commercial success and prevent piracy just doesn't hold true. For example, the piracy rates of Supreme Commander actually decreased when the DRM was removed via a patch. Sins of a Solar Empire was released without any DRM at all and it's been extremely successful. Sure it's pirated but most people I know who pirated it on release day later went on to buy it, including me.
Speaking personally, almost every Steam-based game I've ever pirated I later purchased. The games are usually very well supported via Steam's message board and since patches are so easy to deliver (ie automatically) bugs are very quickly dealt with. To me the value of what I'm purchasing is virtually always higher than the asking price making it a simple decision to whip out my credit card. Actually they keep it on file so it's crazy easy to buy a game.
And incase you still think you're right about this take a good look at Apple. OSX's piracy rate for the last few years has been virtually nonexistant yet OSX 10.7's DRM is the most archaic of any OS ever released. There were no serial keys, no activation service, and the OS was like $30, there was no reason to pirate it. Yet in the name of user convenience, Apple has actually made it significantly less convenient to own and I have no clue how I'm supposed to support it in the PC repair field. Imagine if Microsoft forced everyone to download Windows7 from the Microsoft Marketplace and required that you have Windows Vista to upgrade to it. It would be a complete and total disaster.
DRM is about maintaining absolute control over content. The only role piracy plays is that of a scape goat. In the name of profit protection, user freedom will be sacrificed. Of course publishers don't have a problem with this; what I can't understand is why users don't seem to mind either. One day all games will be delivered in a way similar to OnLive, when that day comes gaming will die. Again.
