EXCLUSIVE: CompTIA Settles Suit Against Cheet-Sheets.com; Launches Industry "Security Council"
10/3/2001 -- The Computer Technology Industry Association (CompTIA) confirmed to CertCities.com last week that it has settled a copyright and trademark lawsuit against Keen Interactive, owners of the site Cheet-Sheets.com.
According to court documents, the suit was originally filed by CompTIA in both the Cook County State Court and the U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois (where it was eventually litigated) on May 21. It stemmed from allegations that Cheet-Sheets.com -- known for its advertising motto of "actual questions from actual tests" -- violated CompTIA's copyrights by selling questions that appear on CompTIA's A+ and other exams.
"We feel obliged to protect the integrity of our program," said Lutz Ziob, vice president of certification for CompTIA. "We also believe that as an industry association...we have a role to play."
Ziob told CertCities.com that Keen Interactive agreed to the following settlement terms:
- Destruction by Keen of all CompTIA-related materials in its possession.
- Disclosure of all customers who purchased CompTIA-related materials.
- Payment of undisclosed financial damages.
- A permanent injunction prohibiting Keen from using CompTIA's trademarks on its site.
Keen Interactive confirmed the settlement terms to CertCities.com, but the company otherwise declined to comment for this story, citing legal concerns. CompTIA materials have not been available on the Cheet-Sheets.com Web site for several months.
The settlement and injunction were filed with the court on Sept. 17. Days later, CompTIA sent a mass e-mail to Keen's customers asking them to either destroy the Cheet-Sheets in their possession or send them to CompTIA (reports vary as to the e-mail's content).
CompTIA said it sent the e-mail for two reasons. "We wanted to notify them [the recipients] that the information they received violates a whole slew of copyright and other laws, both at the state and federal level," Ziob explained. "We also wanted to stop them from disseminating the information further and opening themselves up [to] possible liability."
When asked if CompTIA was planning on taking any disciplinary actions against those who received the Cheet-Sheets, Ziob replied, "Absolutely not...There's no kind of judgment here." Ziob also said that so far the response to the e-mail has been mostly positive: "Many [people] thanked us for letting them know."
While this suit has been settled, future litigation may not be far off. Several certification programs whose tests are also covered by Cheet-Sheets.com materials confirmed to CertCities.com that they have been keeping an eye on this suit, including Microsoft and Prosoft Training.com. (Novell declined to comment.)
None would confirm whether they are considering legal action, but Microsoft's Director of Certification Skills and Assessment Anne Marie McSweeney issued the following statement to CertCities.com: "Microsoft is aware of the issues surrounding Cheet-Sheets.com. The value of certification resides in a given credential clearly representing a skill set and demonstrating that an individual has experience working with the technologies. Those companies and individuals who attempt to circumvent the normal process of earning a certification do a grave disservice to the industry and to themselves. Microsoft is committed to maintaining the integrity of the MCP program credentials and supports exam security across the high-tech industry."
As part of the commitment, Microsoft -- along with Novell, Prosoft, Vue, Prometric and other industry vendors -- has joined a "security council" started by CompTIA to address the issue of "braindump" sites as well as other industry concerns. CompTIA is scheduled to announce the new council officially next week. According to Fran Linhart, director of certification for CompTIA, the council is a joint effort with the Association of Test Publishers. Rob Pedigo, former director of Sun Microsystems' certification program, has been hired to run the program, Linhart said.
While the security council has been in the works for some time, CompTIA was careful to point out that the Cheet-Sheets.com suit was not connected in any way to the council: "We [CompTIA] did this on our own," Linhart said.
CertCities will bring you more on this story as it develops. -B.N.
|
There are 159  user Comments for “EXCLUSIVE: CompTIA Settles Suit Against Cheet-Sheets.com; Launches Industry "Security Council"”
|
|
Page 6 of 16
|
| 10/23/01: test says: |
I feel little sympathy for the vendors and their tests. As far as training and test prep goes for any of the certifications, it should follow the old adage, 1. Tell them what you are going to tell them. (test objectives, skills required by vendor) 2. Tell(train) them (all of the facts and information needed to do the job) 3. Tell them what you have just told them. (summarize information that helps them prepare for the test's objectives). If the vendors tests actually followed their own guidelines, companies like transcender, troytec, etc would not even be in business. There wouldn't be any need for such test prep companies if the vendors were straightforward and honest. If the tests actually followed the objectives. Also, why can't you ever buy a SINGLE book to cover ALL the exam objectives? I mean, just read the reviews on Amazon.com for the certification books. [Book1 covers everything well except test objective X. Book2 covers everything except objective Y. Book 3 covers everything except objective Z.] I have yet to ever find a single book I could buy for an exam that was all encompassing. Then to add salt to the wound, some of the vendor's own books (like MS Press) that are sold specifically for a certain exam FAIL to cover even most of the objectives of the exam. What about compressed learning events? I have to wonder how much different the "bootcamps" are from the "self study" cram sheets, except for the thousands of dollars difference in price. I don't notice the condemning of bootcamps? How much more can you really expect out of someone who went to a one week bootcamp, compared to someone who read books for a month and then bought cram sheets to pass a test? In either case, where is the experience? If an employer wanted someone with at least a year's experience on equipment then neither case qualifies. You can't get a years worth of hands on experience from someone who only read books about the equipment, and you aren't getting a year's worth of real experience from someone who spent just a few hours with the equipment during a one week bootcamp. The fair way would be to test candidates is in a lab type environment. The candidate can get the training any way they want, but come test time they'll be expected to show some test proctor exactly HOW to accomplish various test objectives. It could start with basics, like installing an OS, then proceed to setting up a network of users, then applying security, then adding peripherals, then tuning and performance. Until the vendors come clean with the test candidates and test fairly and consistently, without esoteric, useless and trick questions, then I think it's naive to expect candidates to NOT level the playing filed by using cram sheets and brain dumps. |
| 10/25/01: Darlene says: |
Great Idea!!!! I get tired of hearing about paper MCSE's or MCP's. I worked hard to gain my experience and I hate being compaired to those guys who have certifications but no experience. |
| 10/27/01: Joe says: |
Say you're at work and configuring R&RAS, IIS, WINS or anything else, and your network crashed. You are a certified MCSE, and remember a similar question on your Network Infrastructure exam, but do not recall the proper procedure off hand. Your co-worker is a paper MCSE and has the answer to your question readily available on a CHEET SHEET or Transcender in their desk. Would you use it to get your system up in a timely manner, or would you explain to your department director that you don't believe in the ethics of cheet sheets, so you'll get back to him in a couple hours after you have read a few chapters in your Microsoft Training Kit Windows 2000 Network Infrastructure Administration Study Guide for Exam 70-216? All the while several hundred users are sent home due to the systems being down. (Obviously a hypothetical question since the 'REAL' MCSE's know everything, and never have to look anything up) Even a paper MCSE has to know their stuff to pass the test. Whether they know the stuff by reading the actual questions, or by reading a book, THEY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS! Take the recent A+ exam for example. I have 15 years of computer building background and couldn't make heads or tails of their mother board depictions. They might as well have been drawn by a 4 year old with legos for "trace-arounds". Or their Net+, I have 6 years professional cabling and infrastructure, design and project management experience and have never once been asked by, a client to provide an 802.* specificaltion on any documentation, including government contracts. (ie: bids, proposals, RFP's, etc.) So why does CompTIA test on obscure facets of the business that are rarely used? You shouldn't need a Cheet Sheet to figure this out, answer:$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$! Get real people! Why should these certifying bodies be upset, unless they are not providing you all the proper instruction in their documentation to successfully complete their exams, which in turn cuts into their profit margin by the candidates purchasing other study guides, to which CompTIA does not own stock in. And passing the tests on the first attempt. Anyone in the business knows that IT is not that complicated. It's just that the sanctioning bodies twist alot of stuff up in order to make a buck. Welcome to business 101! Like it or not it is the American way. It is how America does business. Its cut throat, and at most times unethical. The purpose of a study guide is to prepare you for the exam. When was the last time you saw a Microsoft study guide with even a remotely similar example in their documentation to what they place on the test? Simple answer, never! Besides, if there is such a difference in quality of the Engineer between these paper MCSE's, CNE's, CCNA's, and the "REAL" Engineers, why can't the "REAL" Engineers pass the interview, to get the job? Afterall that's the real point to this debate, isn't it? Face it. The difference is marginal. How many people know a PhD, that don't have sense enogh to tie their shoes? Or a college drop out like Larry Ellison, or Michael Dell? Bottom line, don't blame CHEET SHEETS for your not being able to provide the personal skills required to pass an interview. KWITCHERBICHEN Joe Schmoe Help Desk sTupervisor A+, Net+, MCP Win2k, MCP Server 2k, CCNA |
| 10/29/01: Shane says: |
Why aren't these companies that are so worried about braindumps doing something about changing they're testing format? Take for instance, the MCSE. MS should take a look at Cisco's CCIE and learn how testing should be done, we'd have no more paper MCSE's. If a student had to go into a lab, design and set up a WIN2000 network...DNS, DHCP, AD, etc. hands-on to be able to obtain the MCSE status, it would be far more valuable. Until then, it will continue to go downhill and we will continue to debate this issue. MCSE, A+, Net+ |
| 11/8/01: Dorian says: |
I blame the certification companies for the way they set up their tests--it's true (for example, many MS exams don't test you on what you should know in order to be competent but on some obscure ninny-nanny B*S* subject that hardly ever comes up in everyday work). I also blame the employers(!) because many won't give people a reasonable chance to get into the field unless you know someone who will wedge the door open at the HR department (the true bane of many potential entry-level employees). Where does that leave us, those with no track record in the IT field who desperately want just the chance to get in and prove one's own worth? Well, gee whiz, there's trade schools or studying on your own and hoping like Hell that maybe (just maybe!) someone will look at your resume, see that you're A+/MCSE 2000 certified, and decide to take a chance. All it takes is one chance, right? Uh-huh. Call me bitter, but I'm disgusted at having worked my ass off, studying, designing and dismantling my own private networks for practice, getting certified, etc., and seeing good entry level IT jobs pass right on by. Yes, it's the usual Catch-22 bullsh*t, no experience = no job, and everyone's the poorer for it. P.S. I agree with Daniel Beck, the brain dumps are inherently wrong but that's the fun of it! You pore through them and you figure out why the answer to a particular question is wrong (or right). That's one way in which 'dumps' can be useful. Another good point is that 'dumps' can help a person get in the right frame of mind for how an exam is. Some tests are straight-forward but some aren't, thus it's a help. Memorizing is B*S*, however. Don't kid yourselves on that. The feeling you get from passing an exam based upon what you know (and truly understand) is great. |
| 11/9/01: Anonymous says: |
I feel strongly that Comptia, Microsoft and the likes are like screaming children or crocodiles if you prefer. Because they make such a lousy exams (based on fact-knowledge and from a very limited database), it is easy to circumvent them. The only solution would be that they do not consider the certification trajects as a extra revenue, but that they put some real effort in it. Make some serious questions. Make a database of 5000 questions, such that learing any "cheet sheet" would be the same of learning all the stuff the exam is really about. Myself, I really studied for 4 of my MCSE exams and put an effort in it. Looking things up in Technet, making a test environment and such. However, for the last exams, I only studied braindump for an hour or 10 and passed them with an even higher score and much less knowledge. |
| 11/10/01: PAPERBOY!!!!!! says: |
people that seems to "HATE" on Paper MCSE's were once or still are Paper MCSE's...i know that for a fact...i have MS Guru's that are MCT's who work for my company that are and were Paperchasers..as far as im concerned so called real MCSE's and their Paper counterparts are all the same....its how you get there and if you want it bad enough you will succeed, knowledge and skill comes in time, you all know that i assume...for all those people that are 'HATEING" on these Paperchasers well they are all just HYPHOCRITS and they are just SORE LOSERS!!!!! |
| 11/10/01: PAPERBOY!!!!! says: |
EXCUSE ME!!!! MR. Joe Schmoe "YOU SAID IT" Allelujah.....you are not lieing....AHEM...Mr. Schmoe would you be interested on 6 figure job?...well i take that back..it seems like you already have one huh! DARN i could use somebody like you on my IT Dept. somebody w/not just brains and a common sense but also a down to earth heart...I SALUTE YOU SIR!!!! |
| 11/10/01: Olivier says: |
i cant live with the guilt anymore i have to confess. i am a paper mcse, I AM SORRY. i am such a LOOSER=( |
| 11/10/01: TestPrep Man says: |
me also, im a looser. |
First Page Previous Page Next Page Last Page
|
|
|
|
