I’ve spoken a number of times that Google’s patent need to create massive backend services is short sighted, and their unwillingness to move heavily into peer2peer solutions is outdated. Maybe it’s just the thought of acres and acres (literally) of hard drives that creeps me out. Usually I am talking in reference to Google Search vs Social Search. But here’s another model: YouTube servers (Google) versus Joost peer2peer (Skype). What makes me laugh is that Viacom has moved from YouTube (leaving behind a 1 billion dollar lawsuit) and gone to Joost. Lovely wikigoodness:

Joost (pronounced ‘juiced’) is an interactive software for distributing TV shows and other forms of video over the Web using peer-to-peer tv technology, created by Niklas Zennström and Janus Friis (founders of Skype and Kazaa)….

Viacom Inc. and Joost entered into a content provider agreement for the Joost platform on February 20, 2007. Under the agreement divisions of Viacom (including MTV Networks, BET Networks and Paramount Pictures) will license their “television and theatrical programing” to Joost.[4] This came shortly after Viacom requested 100,000 potentially infringing videos to be removed from YouTube.com, which showed a preference by Viacom for the Joost platform over YouTube.[5]

Joost also currently has licensing agreements in place with Ministry of Sound TV, Warner Music and the production company Endemol.[6]

Well guys, if don’t they understand that if a centralised video hosting service can’t control the content, how can a peer2peer video distribution service? (Simplistically, peer2peer meaning that the consumer passes the content, all sliced up, directly to other Joost consumers , as opposed to downloading from a YouTube server). Good luck to ’em.

A little edit: I don’t have a picture for you because Joost is a freaking Flash site. ><
I signed up for the beta – ends today or tomorrow. You go on the end of a long list UNLESS you know someone who has a “beta token”. Sooooo, anyone out there got one? For me? Pleeeaaase?