Police Seize Assets of TestKiller.com
7/10/2002 -- On June 6 San Antonio police seized assets of TestKiller Ltd., the company that runs the practice exam Web site TestKiller.com.
According to a police report filed with the Bexar County, Texas District Court on June 20, the raid was prompted by Microsoft, who alleged that the site was selling Microsoft certification exam questions.
In his affidavit, seizing police officer Daniel Flaharty, a detective in the Special Crimes Unit of the San Antonio Police Department, wrote that he was contacted by a representative from the anti-piracy office of Microsoft. The unnamed representative alleged to Flaharty that TestKiller Ltd. was selling Microsoft "trade secrets" in the form of questions and answers to Microsoft exams.
According to the report, Flaharty began an investigation based on Microsoft's complaint, which led to the June 6 seizure of $408,566.84 in cash as well as several phones, printers, computer equipment, software and other items from at least one location.
No charges have been filed in this investigation. Calls made to the Bexar County district attorney's office to determine whether the investigation was ongoing were not returned as of press time.
Garry L. Neale, one of Testkiller Ltd.'s owners, politely declined CertCities.com's request for an interview, referring all questions to his attorney, who is out of the country this week.
A spokesperson for Microsoft confirmed that the company was aware of the investigation but said he could not comment on it due to the legal nature of the story.
The Testkiller.com Web site has been offline since early June.
Neale is the former owner of Troy Technologies (TroyTec.com), which in December settled a civil copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit brought by certification vendor CompTIA (see "CompTIA v. TroyTec Settled; Company Pulls CompTIA-Related Products from Site, Denies Wrongdoing").
CertCities.com will continue to follow this story and bring you further updates as they develop.  -B.N.
|
There are 254  user Comments for “Police Seize Assets of TestKiller.com”
|
|
Page 12 of 26
|
| 7/15/02: Anonymous from Minnesota says: |
Yeah, these Testkillers are not bad. As long as you actually have the experience and know the material, I do not see anything wrong with it. If you don't have the experience to back up the certification, then what good are you? I'm an MCSA, "How do I setup an IP address on a NIC?" Point has been made...... |
| 7/15/02: Anonymous says: |
You don't get it. They are selling the actual questions word for word. This is cheating! What's the point of wasting $125.00 to take the test if you already saw the questions and answers? This devalues the MCSE and MS certs and hurts the people that have passed these tests without cheating and the credibility of the cert as well as the salaries! |
| 7/15/02: Anonymous says: |
You don't get it. They are selling the actual questions word for word. This is cheating! What's the point of wasting $125.00 to take the test if you already saw the questions and answers? This devalues the MCSE and MS certs and hurts the people that have passed these tests without cheating and the credibility of the cert as well as the salaries! |
| 7/15/02: Anonymous says: |
Last year I wrote my exchange 5.5 exam. I read the microsoft training kit, product documentation, technet, ressource kit and the Sybex training book. The questions at the exam were mostly word for word out of that last book? So I ask you: am I a cheater because I studied out of a book that I bought? This book is a Microsoft approved study guide. But can i blame microsoft... there are only so many different ways to ask the same questions. If they really want to solve the braindumps problem, they should seriously think about a practical exam. Do they really want to solve that issue? Do we? |
| 7/15/02: Sean from London says: |
I've been an MCT for 5 years now and I can see both sides of the argument. The use of braindumps is undoubtedly unethical because (all other things being equal) a person who has been exposed to braindumps will always have a better chance of passing an exam than one who hasn't regardless of experience, competence or ability. But if Microsoft made their exam questions consistent with their published exam objectives, and if the questions were changed on a more frequent basis (or if the question pool was larger), the problem would not exist in the first place. Some are putting forward the argument that a person with experience should pass the exam and that it should take more than just reading a book or attending a course to learn the subject matter, and I agree, but the way the exams are currently structured the objectives have very little to do with the content of the exam, and questions will crop up on obscure details which even the most experienced specialist in the product would potentially not have been exposed to. Conversely some more crucial aspects of the product are not be covered at all. Basically what's happening is Microsoft are saying "we will test you on a, b and c" and in the exam you get questions about x, y and z. Anyone who's been in IT long enough will know that nobody knows EVERYTHING about any one product, no matter how long they have been using it, it would simply take years to learn all the most obscure details of a particular product. On top of that a candidate will on one sitting typically see a third of the exam question pool and these questions will not be changed over a period of years. I am not condoning braindumps but I think Microsoft have brought this problem upon themselves, they have created the perfect environment for the braindump-centric paper MCP mentality: misleading exam objectives, small and static question pool and obscure subject matter. |
| 7/15/02: Hawk from somewhere says: |
How can so many egos fit on one website? Want to know what is wrong with certs? Just keep reading all of these posts. |
| 7/15/02: Anonymous says: |
We all know a paper boy when we see 'em! We can smell 'em. We can see it in their eyes of confusion, when we talk that computer illusion, when we gaulk that computer talk that confuses the paper boy's every thought, no technet, no web help... tell me what you gonna do booooyyyyy!!! DO YOU SMELLLLL WHAT MICROSOFT IS COOKING!!!!! |
| 7/16/02: Anonymous from Miami, FL says: |
Amen, Sean. No one is even saying anything about Transcenders, whom ms doesnt bother. "Money, the root of all evil". |
| 7/16/02: Anonymous says: |
I used the braindumps available on the Internet in the following way while I was studying: I would research, question for question, whether the braindumper's answers were correct, form my own opinion and rethink the whole thing. I found value in this as it taught me to think wider than just the MOC that I had already studied by then, and also as the braindumps were shockingly incorrect for the most part. I also had to go into the Transcender exams at our training center and see why these questions were answered the way they were. It's totally useless parroting the questions and answers - Microsoft changed a word or two in some of the questions on the actual exam, giving the question a whole new meaning - how can a parrot answer that? There is however, some value in other people's questions as it does teach you to think in a broader sense, and of course MOC do NOT teach you everything you need to know. |
| 7/16/02: Anonymous says: |
I passed all of my NT4 MCSE Exams without even having used NT4 once. I was a paper MCSE trained by braindumps. However, this got my foot in the door with interviews. In these interviews, I was honest about my inexperience and expressed a willingness to learn, and here I am a few years later with tons of hard experience in the trenches. There's no sense in worrying about people who use braindumps, the dumb ones will get weeded out by the real world anyway (I've already seen it happen many times). |
First Page Previous Page Next Page Last Page
|
|
|
|
