So it is all the worst aspects of the activation model, but it is okay because they say it is? :p
Seriously though, if you ignore the lack of a rootkit (and, honestly, I think the term "rootkit" has mostly been used as some anti-DRM propaganda), you still have the exact same thing as the dreaded Securom model used for Mass Effect PC (but with 7 more activations before you have to call a much less staffed tech support center :p). Hell, I would be interested in seeing exactly what their DRM consists of, because I wouldn't be surprised if there is a "Torchlight Driver" in the same vein as a "Securom Driver".
Don't get me wrong, I am usually not one of those people who screams about DRM (except for limited activations. Those piss me off for obvious reasons), but I do get pissed off when marketing like this tries to sell their DRM by badmouthing other models that are almost exactly the same.
Any word on the Steam DRM? Is it just Steam, or does it also use the "not a rootkit" activation model?

I'm not 100% certain but I think the only DRM on the Steam version is the Steam platform itself.

Yes, it is using only Steam DRM. You can play and install your game anywhere and anytime.

Agreed.
I guess people are not suppose to care about the DRM since it such a good game and Runic are good guys.

Should have used Goo. I have been made a fan of that "DRM-Lite" after the amazing personal display I was privy to during the D2D sale. Buy East India from D2D for $5, activate via Goo on Impulse. AMAZING flexability and consideration for the consumer.

Really? How do you find it to be all that more flexible? So far, every example of GOO I have seen has been (essentially) the same as Steam, just you don't need the client to start the game (I think that is true of D2D as well).
And it is really just another activation model. Only difference is that Impulse handles the activation in the background, rather than getting the pop-up saying that Securom is activating. So all the complaints against activation models apply to GOO as well :p
Don't get me wrong, I love it. I just feel that people should actually know what they are saying, and not just say that one DRM is good or bad because of the name and reputation.

I'll care about DRM when it actually impacts my use and enjoyment of a game. I'll be thirty in a few months, been gaming since I was about fourteen or so back in the days of code wheels -- in all that time not once has DRM been an issue for me. In theory, I understand why people don't like it. However, I'm a pragmatist and -- in practice -- it's never effected me.
And yes I do believe in supporting quality developers that communicate with their player base and sell games at reasonable prices.

There's no problems with this DRM. You get ten activations, and then more if you need them. Complaining about that seems pretty petty.

And yet, people do it :p. And I somehow doubt that people who complain about the activation model Securom always are complaining about the combination of driver and activation model, even when they don't mention said driver.
Like I said. Double standards.
That being said, I do suspect I'll be buying this from Steam. Looks fun.

I'd like to believe that, like you, I'm fairly pragmatic when it comes to the matter of DRM. To date I haven't been seriously burned by any form of DRM, but a factor that I believe has contributed to this is that I do a fair amount of homework on any titles I'm thinking about buying to see what the potential issues are of any DRM used, and additionally what actual issues other people are having, and based on these things avoid titles where I think there's a meaningful chance the DRM will give me a headache. While I can understand that it's quite natural to not see much of a practical issue if you haven't encountered any problems yourself, the problem is that waiting until you actually do run into a problem means you've forked over some amount of money for a non-functional product before learning what to avoid. I'm of the belief that while a smart man learns from his own mistakes a smarter man learns instead from the mistakes of others.
Looking through the Torchlight support forum it actually looks like there are a fair number of people who aren't able to activate their copies due to issues connecting to the activation server, and others having issues with significant delays in receiving their activation keys. So far it doesn't look like either issue has been sorted.
The central issue with any kind of remote authentication DRM is that the user is relying on being able to connect to remote server in order to be able to install their game. If for any reason that user isn't able to connect then no install for them. This issue is unsurprisingly already coming up with the Torchlight DRM, even though it's not particularly widespread. Personally I'm still waiting on a non-Steam demo to see to what extent I'm even interested in the game.

Well said.

Goo is a one-time DRM that basically prevents anyone other than the license holder from activating it.

So does this mean you could take whatever file or files the program installs from after activation, move them to a computer without an internet connection, and install the program without any issues? This is something often implied when GOO is discussed, but which I haven't yet been able to get a solid answer on. Any information would be appreciated.

One time per installation. And you have to activate the game using Impulse or some other method involving emails that I don't think has ever been implemented.
So it has a one-time, per install, activation. Hmm? Why does that sound so familiar. Oh, that's right, it is the same model used by most modern flavors of Securom, at least as far as the user is concerned (I won't get into disc checks or just bits of DRM that check to make sure it has been activated, because those are old as dirt, and might even be a part of GOO for all we know).
And newsflash: Pretty much every single DRM model prevents anyone other than the license holder from activating it. Until you start considering piracy and the like.
I too am interested in this. Honestly, Stardock has been VERY vague with regard to what GOO is actually doing.
Here is what little I know about it:
Activation model. It needs to be activated at least once per download (probably once per install)
Apparently, some of the files are encrypted by GOO. GOO decrypts them when you activate it.
And that is really it.