Germy, the difference is that they are two absolutely different schemes.
Windows Media DRM won't play on unauthorized computers/devices that can't phone home.
In contrast, digital watermarks do not impede playback whatsoever. They merely provide a unique digital signature (imbedded and supposedly unremovable from the audio track) which can be used to prove the original content owner. So, in the case of pirated music, this theoretically allows authorities to identify the original illegal sharers.
Digital watermarks are much trickier to implement, since they're "within" the audio-- in other words it must be done carefully so it isn't audible yet must be able to withstand changes in compression that often occur when moving files.
Google has the muscle and financial backing to earn the labels trust in using a DWM scheme. Plus, the labels had great incentive to change the pirate friendly Chinese market. BLLN has no such trust or goodwill and it is difficult to imagine they would get the same benefit of the doubt by labels. But it isn't impossible.
In any case, these technologies are as far from the "same freaking thing" as you termed it, as can be!
Put more time in DD and research and less in personal attacks to WR and others and you'll learn more and lose less $$, no offense.
AI
