Most people think in terms of DRM as 'use encryption to thwart unwanted uses', which, as a concept, is just stupid.
In order to get users the ability to view digital media, they must be able to decrypt it. So people that impliment AACS and such things are, by simple fact of reality, giving their customers everything they need to circumvent the DRM (hardware capable of decrypting, software capable of decrypting, and the decryption keys)
So the only way that sort of scheme really works is through complex obsofcation, deception, lies, and misdirection. They hide as well as they can the actual functioning of the system to try to make it 'secure'. Which, as we all know, security by obsofcation is not the sort of security that can't possible stand up to scrutiny for very long.
So that's 'bad' drm.
The DRM here is just a program looking at the flag in a file and performing a (somewhat backwards) way of notifing the user about the apparent wishes of the person that created the file.
It's open, it's obvious, it depends on people's judgement, it's easy to work around if you have to.
So that's 'good' drm. When a scheme like that is implimented using Free software then it can actually have a positive effect.
I think that is still 'drm' though. Just the type that is actually sane.