Not going to get too far into it (since a lot of the militantly anti-DRM people get REALLY angry when they realize they have been supporting DRM :p), but if you just ignore the lack of a client (and honestly, the download manager is really the same thing :p), it is no more (or less) DRM than Impulse (excluding the third party DRMs attached to Impulse on a game-by-game basis).
What I think hurts the anti-DRM "movement" more than anything else is that everyone thinks in terms of black and white. In a "perfect" world, we would have no DRM (well, I disagree, but I find Steam to be a damned useful toy :p). But it isn't a "perfect" world. So we need to compromise. No publisher will ever listen to whackjobs screaming that all DRM has to go bye bye. But if you show that you are okay with DRM if the benefits outweigh the penalties, you get stuff like Steam and EA's DLC model.

I'm guessing you're right about the latter, but not about the former. Protecting the integrity and distribution of programs is all about managing copyrights and intellectual property.

Some people never change.

An anti Steam day? I'm in. :)
*off*
challenge: do not buy or play any Steam game for 24 hour.

It's not a question of "how Strict" but more of how much people have a clue what a DRM is... I know that there are some "lunatics" that thinks that the copyright notice at the beginning of books is also a DRM but let's hope they are the exception and not the norm.
That's because, and it was already mentioned tons of times before, Impulse by itself IS NOT a DRM, like Steam. If you buy Braid or some others Indy games on Impulse they are going to be 100% DRM-free exactly like if you buy Commander Keen, or some other DosBox using games, on Steam they are also going to be 100% DRM free.
But if you buy Red Faction on Impulse or retail, even if it doesn't require Impulse to run, it will still contains a DRM.
People should make the difference between what is needed to obtain the games and what is needed to run it, that's where the big difference is...
With GoG you need to log on once to download the game....
With Impulse, Steam, Securom, etc... you need to log on to download the game (if you buy it online) BUT THEN you will need to log on every time you want to play the game one a new computer or every time you change something significant in your hardware...

A suggestion? Order all a GoG T-shirt before 4th May and wear it on your workday.

Said I wasn't going to go into it because certain people get VERY angry (and then start following me around and complaining that I don't periodically make a post saying "I fully agree with this and have nothing meaningful to add" :p), but let me just say this:
I am fairly certain that half these forums (myself included :p) will yell at you if you say that Steam and Impulse don't count as DRM :p. Especially since your definition now means that HL2, Counter-Strike, L4D(2), and GalCiv2 are all 100% DRM-Free :p
As far as the use of the word "DRM" goes, I think we all have a generally similar definition. The problem comes around when you get to those grey areas. Some people (myself included) don't really count GoG as DRM. But that is probably mostly because its DRM model is so minimal and relaxed compared to almost everything else out there (plus, they were smart and used the buzz word "100% DRM Free" :p). But then you have things like when Stardock was first selling GalCiv2, and people thought that had no DRM (newsflash: they don't anymore). Then you have things like the indie devs who tag the downloads but say they have no DRM. And, of course, Ubi-DRM which is a "service" and not "DRM". And it just becomes a mess.
And that mess becomes pretty important when people start saying "No DRM" rather than fighting against particular kinds of DRM.

Nope, re-read my definition, HL2, Counter-Strike, L4D1&2 are not DRM-free.
For GalCiv2 it's a little more complicated (see bellow)
Well there is no grey area as far as GoG is concerned, it doesn't include any DRM, having a copyright notice/EULA is not a DRM and requiring you to connect to download a game is not a DRM either.
Yes if you want "Grey area" then Stardock games are the perfect examples, like I mentioned before, are very "blurry" with they DRM usage, some version being DRM-free... then having a DRM added with a patch... then removed by some other patch... then added again later...
Of course a little detail that Stardock completely forget to mention when they claim that the retail version of their games are DRM-free... (but I am sure it's 200% purely unintentional :-) )
What did you mean by "tag the downloads" ? having watermark on the file or something else ?
In Ubi or EA C&C4 case it's not gray anything... it's just pure BS, it's just some PR guys trying to play on people ignorance who hope that by renaming DRM they will lure peoples into thinking that it's not DRM.

DING DING DING DING DING! :p
That is basically my point. Most people don't know what DRM is (and let me just save the peanut gallery some time, "Der, har har! You don't know either!" But wait until the end :p). And quite frankly, I don't either. None of us do, because we are clearly not indicative of the "average gamer".
Because, at the end of the day, "what DRM is" is not what the definition (no matter how you define the poorly defined catchall) says. It is not even what the marketing gurus say. It is what people think DRM is.
That is why people were perfectly okay with disc checks when they were raging against the proverbial machine about activation-model Securom. That is why people are okay with GoG, but morally opposed to Impulse or D2D (ignoring the regional restrictions issue :p). That is why Ubi marketed Ubi-DRM as a service. Hell, that is why people were okay with Steam but hated activation-model Securom (I am still one of those people :p). Hell, that is why half the games in the "DRM Free" thread on this very forum have DRM :p
And that is why an "International Day Against DRM" will fail miserably. And by "fail miserably", I mean something of the magnitude of the L4D2 boycott (or the Modern Warfare 2 Boycott).
Well, that and the fact that it seems to be organized by a drunken poster at a single (and comparatively small) message board :p
Don't fight on the side of absolutes. Fight on the side of compromise. You might get branded "pro-establishment" because you aren't burning your bra, but you are a lot more likely to get a satisfactory conclusion ("Well, we have DRM on everything, but at least it is the Steam and/or DLC-based model instead of the Ubi-model" being my hope).

Is that me? Lmao, no this is a legit. campaign by the FSF. I edited my post above.
See: http://www.defectivebydesign.org/
Didn't think I would start such a big argument, just felt you guys would be interested in this sort of thing, and I wanted to know your thoughts.
Ps. Tantrix I like your idea, I'll probably do that myself (not that I'll be likely to leave the house much that day :P)

Your post was a good post, most of us have been boycotting DRM for many years. Now, get some popcorn and sit back and watch as Gersen makes a noble effort to make a point, any point, over the next few pages . . . =)

Ah, apologies. Never bothered to look back at the first post.

But physical inability to resell is DRM. Once you buy a game it is permanently bound to you, that is DRM. Not very restrictive, but DRM none the less.

Then the games here on GOG are not DRM-free for that matter, since in the EULA you have to accept to install the game in paragraph 1. it's stated you only get granted a license to use the software. No ownership here.
I haven't come across a single game (priced of course) that grants you full ownership over it.