You wanted the opinion of someone who ripped Blizzard in the SC2 thread, and I guess I qualify.
Comparing the single-player DRM of Elemental to SC2 is apples and oranges. Elemental has no single-player DRM; SC2 does. I'm against DRM in single-player, period. As far as this goes, I'm still happy with Stardock, and still unhappy with Blizzard.
Comparing the multi-player experience ... well, here we have apples and apples. What Stardock is doing for LAN is DRM. It's streamlined, easy-to-use DRM, but this is a spade that needs to be called a spade: it's DRM. (However, Frogboy is quite correct in that this is not copy protection.)
The over-arching question is, "Is DRM appropriate in this case?"
My answer is no. I have a great deal of respect for Frogboy, but in this case I think he is wrong.
I think it's dishonest to say that "Everyone who has a LAN should have internet access, therefore requiring registration for LAN play is OK." That's the same argument as, "Everyone who has a computer should have internet access, therefore requiring registration for single player is OK," and it wasn't relevant or even true then. The fact is that Stardock is trying to maintain a hold on their game after release, which infringes on the rights of the game's consumers.
Furthermore, I think that requiring DRM on LAN games directly conflicts with Article 8 of Frogboy's own Gamer's Bill of Rights: "Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers." Stardock clearly trusted me when I was only playing single player, even though I had the option to send copies of the DVD to every person in the state of Oregon. Why am I being treated differently if I bring three of my friends over to my house? Are they that terrible of an influence on me?
I understand Frogboy is ticked off right now, because I think some of the critics in this thread have been less than civil. But I hope that someday soon he can put them aside and impartially re-examine his position. I honestly believe that he's applying a double standard, given his unequivocal position on single player DRM.
What I keep asking myself is, "Why is the mischief I can get up to with LAN fundamentally different from the mischief I can get up to with single player?" and I can't see enough of a difference to justify the addition of DRM. Besides, if we're only talking about 0.1% of the gaming population, I'm at a loss as to why that small a segment has made Stardock come around 180 degrees in its approach to DRM.
With all that said, I think Tridus' underlying question was: Are you anti-DRM people going to walk away from Elemental now? For me, the answer is that I will still get it and play it. While I think it's a mistake to include LAN DRM, I was never, ever planning on using the multiplayer feature, so everything past my second paragraph is more or less irrelevant to my personal playing experience. Adding DRM to LAN multiplayer affects me about as much as saying the DVD won't include a four-hour wmv file of bowel surgery that they promised us. All I want is the single player game, and Stardock hasn't changed that ... yet.
Oh, and I love the idea of DVD updates. Thanks, Stardock!