Macrovision wants everyone to use Macrovision - and pay for the privledge. DVD producers want to buy low, sell high - and shelling out for Macrovision on a per disc basis is NOT buy low.
These days, the sheer quantity of material on a DVD relative to the price gives the package value. It doesn't need the same degree of protection as VHS tapes might have needed. Having spent all that money on content, and using a low-cost distribution system (the DVD, that is) content producers may be questioning or discovering that they don't need special protective mechanisms. Superbit DVDs only take this one step further, giving you a package that simply isn't worth trying to reproduce.
This is anathema to Macrovision. It wants "use Macrovision" to be a no-brainer decision. There is, as I understand it, a license provision for VHS recorders - in order to have the rights to use VHS technology, you had to respect Macrovision copy-prevention as well. Under such conditions, Macrovision could likely get by without either a marketing or advertising department.
The final nail in the coffin is that almost nobody dumps DVD to VHS, except maybe for the spare VHS machine in the playroom. That's all that Macrovision prevents. It does nothing to stop DVD-to-VCD or DVD-to-DivX transfers, and it doesn't even enter into the picture when large scale illegal distributors manfacture bit-for-bit perfect copies. So, why pay for technology that doesn't solve a problem.