He's not really talking about Firefox, but the role Firefox used to fill, of being the browser that exclusively worked in the interest of its users. Having DRM standardized obligates browsers to work in the interests of the entertainment industry against their users, even when, absent DRM, there are uses of encumbered data that would be legally permissible, like saving a local copy of streaming media so you could play them offline or just to have a backup. Like all IP issues, it's something most people don't care about because unless you're in the entertainment industry, where any kind of restriction on the use of IP is good for you because it creates artificial scarcity that you can use to keep your old business model viable now that there's no inherent cost in reproducing data, or in the technology industry, where restrictions in the use of data based on legal bullshit are always a burden and never a benefit, even and especially when the suits think they're a benefit, it looks like some arcane legal thing you have no reason to care about. Also like all IP issues, you should care because it's your culture you're not allowed to participate in because your legally-enforced role is to be a consumer, not a participant. Homer would get his ass sued off today. In particular, you should care about you software working against you because your software is working against you.