Cannot play a video file
 

I just downloaded this movie file. I checked the Bitzi ticket for this file & all of the downloaders were able to play & recommended it's good quality except one saying "cannot play".

When i play the file, the player shows it's a 2:02mins file & plays a light noisy audeo. there's nothing else in there, no video. has anybody faced ths kinda prob before? wht'd be the solution?
thanx.

Get this player!!! VLC - (click on link) _ (choose nearest mirror site) which has in-built codecs & is generally very reliable. Also good for audio & video streaming, & for dvd/svcd/vcd playback.

thanx for yue reply. yah, i've tried VLC now. it's also doing the same thing. there's a noisy audeo of 2:02mins but no video. is it possible tht the whole video file is associated with only an almost blank audio but no video?

I haven't heard of that before, but I have come across very poorly encoded videos before, obviously by novices.

Why don't you point us to the Bitzi ticket? That's not terroristic, is it?

It would reveal to the public which file is involved so we would delete such a link, yes.

"Hyper-kun", u can send me yur email add so tht i can send u the link. in tht case, it's a private communication & should be okay with the admins i guess. it's really pathetic whn i download a 699MB file for 2 days & can't play it.

Huh? You'd even delete it if that file is public domain? Some of the rules here don't make any sense. Either you believe in freedom of speech and file-sharing or you don't. The bigotry here is really pissing me off. No private communication is going to happen with me. Either you talk to me in public or you don't.

I'm pretty sure VLC violates some US patents, all software does. You better delete that link to VLC unless you want to get sued.

Who were you refering to with the VLC link Hyper-kun? I believe it's not so different to MPlayer which plays tricks to get around Realplayer's copyrights, but it does & it does it legally!

Sorry but who in the world watches RealMedia encoded videos? The codec must be optimized for blind people. I wouldn't watch such crap if you paid me for it. Technically every application which plays DVDs on Unix is "illegal" in the USA because none of them have a CSS license. I was talking about patents though. Patents have *nothing* to do with copyright. It's very simple: Draw a circle, sell it. I can still legally draw circles and sell them as well. Now patent circle drawing. Now I cannot legally draw circles and sell them, even if I have never heard about your circles, your patent and have figured out myself how to draw circles. You don't have to sell me a license for circle drawing, you can just say "no circle drawing for you". Patents can have a duration of 20 years. Maybe people have drawn circles long before but now I have to invest millions of dollars to sue you before the patent is withdrawn. In most parts of the world, software patents do not exist which means software is legal as long as it doesn't illegally copied code or data. That's not the case in the USA. 99,999% of all software whether open source or closed source is illegal if you checked the code for patent violations. That's not a exaggeration but rather the opposite. My point is little can be posted here without becoming a criminal. Forbidding people to mention hashsums, film titles etc. even if it's not a link and no download location is provided is idiotic. Obviously you have been brain-washed by lawyers.

I was not asking for more than the SHA-1 of the video to look it up on Bitzi to verify whether those good comments are maybe spam. Do you really think posting an SHA-1 infringes anyone's copyright? Even BitTorrent trackers are not illegal anywhere and they do *far* more to support sharing of files.

I searched at Bitzi:

"Files described with words 'copyright infringer' Found 0 results..."

Please donate a dollar to Bitzi for wasting their bandwidth. Thanks.

Do you really want to get againjiggai and gnutellaforums in trouble with
the MAFIAA? Of course not. You have already seen how those cartels
willingly bend the rules and common sense to falsely accuse anyone they don't
like and cause them to have to spend thousands just to assert their rights.

If the file in question had copyrighted content then even revealing the hash
breaks the rules we have in place to protect both members and the forums.
Unless it is plainly obvious that the content is in the public domain we will
always scratch out specifics like titles and hashes. Such info is usually
irrelevant to the technical questions being asked and answered in any case.

With that kind of attitude it's no wonder that civil rights disappear day by day. Your claim that mentioning an SHA-1 gets anyone in trouble is downright ridiculous. Why don't you forbid using any one word that may lead to copy-enrighted work when you search for it on Google or elsewhere? Where are you going to draw the line tomorrow? It's a wonder you're allowed to mention LimeWire, BearShare and others here. Someone could use those to download copy-enrighted material and you even help them. Last time I checked only lawyers used such a non-sensical and twisted logic but not sane people.

Magnet links identify the user. We try to protect the members of the forum. DDos'd anyone lately? Last time I had a dig at someone who laughed at ddos'ing someone for a joke as they admitted to doing, I was banned from the hub. :D I think there's reasonable reason to hide people's identities on the forum. JMHO

Mentioning a specific copyrighted work in public in the context of a
possible copyright violation is just plain stupid, and we are not going to risk
that, period.

If you want to blame somebody, blame the litigation-addicted MAFIAA, not us.

You do realize that they probably have people watching these forums, looking
for chances to sue people, don't you? If the file in question was copyrighted
then posting a title or hash to something they claim rights to would be an
open invitation for a subpoena to reveal the identity of againjiggai.

We are not going to bother to investigate whether a copyright is involved or
not, especially as it is not relevant to fixing the software problems we deal
with here every day.

It is not illegal to help someone fix their media player, so we are going to go
ahead and do that. It is not wrong or immoral to scrub out any chance
reference that may lead to a lawsuit, so we are going to do that every time too.

You don't need to know specifically which file was involved in order to
help with a media playing problem. Simple enough?

The SHA-1 is not copy-enrightened. Your perception of reality is pretty distored but I don't know you. Maybe you really live in Guantanamo Bay. I blame you how declares the "MAFIAA" the legislative. I guess if the the "MAFIAA" wants you to jump from a bridge, you'll just go ahead. Maybe the "MAFIAA" is reading these forums, maybe they even use water for cooking. There's no proof, evidence or hint that any reader or author of this forum is going to be sued for anything written in this forum. It's you who spreads this FUD and scares people off.

Of course, I do need to know which file someone is talking about to decide whether there's a problem with the player or the file. Sure Windows users are not used to systematic problem resolution but trial & error, guessing and magic solutions that require a credit card. As I wrote, I just wanted to check the comments at Bitzi because I suspected those positive comments are actually tactical spam.

It's really pointless to discuss with brain-washed people as you. It's just sad that you write more and more so that many visitors are going to believe no matter how much nonsense you write.

There's nothing stopping members from swapping mag links via personal messages, etc. Just not in public where their id is evident whether the object's copyright or whatever. Personal messaging is not the same as emailing so to speak.

We don't allow it in threads like this, period. It cannot be any plainer than that.
We already know those people are watching these forums, as well as Slyck and
many others in the P2P community.

In any case all of these forums have always taken a stand against piracy,
ourselves included, and will never let anyone assist in piracy by posting
specific filenames or hashes which may lead to unauthorized files on the
network.

If you want to trade in such information, you won't find any of it here. We can't
stop people from doing it in private but it will never be allowed in our public
spaces. Sulk somewhere else because we're not going to change the rules just
for you. :p