Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

A dark period for YouTube - not only has Viacom demanded that they remove the 100K or so videos of ViaCom content - but YouTube's own deal with CBS to show clips for David Letterman et. al, has unraveled.

It makes me wonder if YouTube will continue to be the dominant player. I think the content is going to spread across multiple hosts with Video Keiritsus forming between broadcast TV companies and online video hosts.

I am..hadn't tried/played with it, but just installed it. It's....good. Yeah, if anyone's gonna IP TV, seems like these guys.

Embed? How's that jive with the P2P angle; are they implementing p2p, or just selling ads?

Ugh, we will lose all those CBS posts!

When will we ever learn? Networks

Ah! They still think they can control what the hordes on the Internets do? All it takes for all this for all media companies to unravel is for someone to start a YouTube like service in Russia offering all the clips for free, preferably in HD just to drive them made. The MPAA knows better, they got bled out when they wanted to control the Internetz.
http://www.oscartorrents.com/?

Joost, Audeo, TVExt, WinampTV... Who are these companies kidding honestly? YouTube is market dominant. The only reason they cannot reach on a settlement deal is because they are too scared of piracy, the benefits of online video are not explained to them properly in terms of marketing, and most important they want to control the method in the users watch the content. Because then you can do all kinds of stuff again they can't now because of Tivo, mostly force you to watch advertising.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

You're right Farhad - YouTube is dominant, but I don't think it will stay dominant if it is stripped of all of its copyright videos. I love the homebrewed stuff - but the best source has both.

I totally agree, but then again we have to step back a bit here right now and think about what all these IPTV platforms are trying to do and compare similar trends in previous technology areas, many of you remember the fervent nature the digital home was pushed for back in 2001/2002 so much so that Windows created the Media Center edition of it's software, all that industry wankery lead to little to no actual market development in that area.

What makes YouTube great is that it has cornered the market in this area, Google bought YouTube not only because the traffic numbers were higher but also because it's content delivery platform was simply. YouTube works across all platforms to deliver video.

This is not going to be the same with all these IPTV solutions, you will have to obviously download something so they can make sure you can't rip the content in some way. Then work out a way to rape the consumer for money. How exactly do you explain this to consumers who gotten used to the ease of delivery via YouTube? Google knows that ease of use is important. We are all tech savvy here at VS, but let's admit thats not the majority of YouTube.

Just becuase the market trend towards IPTV is huge now doesn't mean you can convince consumer to switch to other restricted venues of content delivery.

All it takes is for one record company to realize that releasing it's entire music video catalogue for consumption actually SELLS your product, not ruin it. But I guess they prefer paying high rates to Viacom to transmit that on MTV and other poor music video websites. Giving it to a YouTube venue opens you up instantly to whole world of new consumers. Not to mention the fact that YouTube results feature high on Google, so you have the best content delivery platform with the best search engine.

Personally, I think all these start-ups are screwed even before becoming beta...the Telecommunications industry is already a couple years into IPTV over here in Europe. Institutions like BT (with their Vision service & Virgin Media in the UK) have positioned themselves to provide the infrastructure and content via deals to distribute directly. Of course, we're still a year or so behind the French and their Canal+ service - but this is the next wave of extra value services that the telecommunications industry needs to expand into further markets (and bump up their profits).

You can't really compare the EU and the North American telecommunications market, while this would work in the EU it wouldn't work in North America. Furthermore what you are talking about is still the same methodology of centralized control, by established telcos BT and Virgin Media tackling the old standard model. What I think is different with Joost and such is that they will try to provide actual online content we get on VS.

In the US as well telecommunications and media companies are too closely related and the already too much lax legislation + pork barrel regulation by the FCC and lobby group representation at Washington DC show how Net Neutrality at one point was being sold to consumers as being more expensive for them.

Furthermore media companies, especially Hollywood are too scared to offer their entire catalogs in digital format because Wal-mart which sells 40% of DVDs currently, would not appreciate a open standard digital source for films that would threaten brick and mortar supply chains. So what they did is launch the Wal-mart service, which is restrictive, ridiculously expensive (8 to 20 dollars), and generally crap because of DRM.

However this crappy service will fade quickly as BitTorrent founder Ashwin Navin is announcing its own legal movie distribution network. So far it sounds good, we all know the speed benefits of BT, there will be no DRM, pricing is said to be reasonable and alot of movies will be free supported by ads.

We will see how this develops. Though I still believe there is a place for IPTV content that is not just limited to supplying Hollywood but rather in the style of VS, i.e. sifted video selection channels by categories.

The user experience with Joost is pretty dang good. One aspect about Joost that I don't know if everyone gets is how quickly they're able to iterate: software can go through major evolution more quickly than firmware/hardware. And these guys understand software. I'd put my money on a software team vs. a cable company anyday.

That said, there is value in a dedicated device. My laptop can emulate a Phone or iPod, but I still have cellphone and iPod velcro'd to it

If Joost can built up an installed base as skillfully as they did with Skype, they'll really have something on their hands. And make no doubt: this could be a global platform. You're in Australia with a relatively small pipe? No problem if a mate down the street has the same content. The idea of content escaping local regulatory bodies, region codes, etc. is fascinating.