Both the necessity and possibility of proving those claims need to exist. Otherwise it's a pointless endeavor. There's no burden of proof on anyone to claim that God does not exist.

I do get what you mean, I don't believe in god and I do sometimes find it baffling why people believe god. But the fact that something cannot be proved wrong doesn't mean it's wrong. If I'm going to say that god does not exist I need to be able to prove it and the burden of proof is definitely on me. If my claim would be true without proof wouldn't that make every religious person ignorant? I do get what you mean with the default state, but claiming that the default state is true if it hasn't been proven is still wrong. Besides, the only reason there is "default state" in god is that you cannot prove that something does not exist. So there isn't similar default state in DRM affecting sales because both can be proved (or neither can be proved).

Some reading about the topic: http://www.strangenotions.com/who-has-the-burden-of-proof-when-discussing-god/