I'd suggest you research the topic of negative and positive liberty. I'm all for a free and open source experience but what about the liberties of content creators? What about my right to as a user to be offered content with the knowledge that I won't and don't want to know its inner workings as long as it's passive non-malicious code?
I will be happy to do so, once consumers and content creators (and specifically the companies they sell rights to) are on a level playing field in terms of legal protections and lobbying powers.
This isn't about the money or power you or I have. This is about freedom to distribute content and the agreement between the user and the creator while you're asking the browser to be the ideological arbiter of this transaction. If you're all for freedom, you should logically see that not including the DRM option is inhibitive of both the user's and the creator's freedoms. As a browser, it should be ideologically agnostic to my downloading of an executable or zip file that goes against freedom, privacy and all that we hold dear and it should still be my right and freedom to download and view as I legally please. The Richard Stallman approach does have its limits.
