<p>Oh that changes EVERYTHING.</p>
<p>I thought the company had been simply using past tests.</p>
<p>Now I'm definitely sympathising with College Board here, as much as I detest them on other occasions.</p>
<p>I didn't think this was such a big deal. My classmate works for this company too and when he told us about it, he made it out to be sort of a joke. I guess it was really serious. =/</p>
<p>She sits for all the exams and then pays to get them in the mail, just like we do. She apparently also said that a lot of them she actually bought from the CB when they used to sell them for use, before 2005(?, I think). After they stopped selling them, they told everyone they had to stop using the ones they had already bought. She believed that she paid for them rightfully and therefore could still use them. Later, the CB issued a complaint and she stopped at that time. But this PSAT thing brought the CB back at her door. Don't quote me exactly, but that was the gist of it months ago.</p>
<p>This is new information. News reports have been unclear. Are you (amyjohnson) saying that KDCP (a) somehow got hold of an unreleased exam and (b) also got hold of a PSAT BEFORE it was administered? This is very different from the news reports I read. They made it seem that KDCP somehow got hold of a PSAT AFTER it had been given. This makes a BIG difference. If what you are saying is true then I can see why KDCP had to pay a one million dollar fine.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's hard, and requires a lot of time and money, and therefore SHOULD be protected by copyright.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually that isn't the legal criteria for copyright ... the important thing is "significant original and <em>creative</em> authorship".</p>
<p>For one thing, the bulk of a CR test isn't even copyrighted by CB, but by others. It's plausible that CB had to spend a lot of time and money looking up the psychometrics, databases and the normal distribution curve to ask their questions, but then this should be a case of trade secret law, or patent law, etc.</p>
<p>The main thing that concerns me is when the tests were distributed -- I simply detest regulations that prevent you from discussing questions <em>you've already done</em> and whose content is stored in your head -- but virtually cheating on a test makes me swing the other direction.</p>
<p>galosien - interesting points. I just finished taking several AP tests. The tests are now completed. As you wrote their content is stored in my head. Why can't I discuss questions with my teachers? They worked hard to prepare me. Yet, if I talk with them about the test I will be treated like a criminal. I don't understand. Your thoughts?????</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yeah right, $1 mllion seems like some profit to me
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Think legal fees and paying people to come up with the tests. It's more than just paper (which, if mass produced, can be quite costly.) </p>
<p>Though, I do think that ~45 bucks for the SAT seems a bit costly <em>cough</em> <em>cough</em></p>
<p>quick comment on the whole "nonprofit" issue:
I think this was brought up earlier, but the CB is NOT and has never claimed to be nonprofit. The article was simply wrong. The CB IS a not-for-profit corporation, and there is an enormous difference, though the two can overlap. Legally and practically, nonprofit and not-for-profit companies are not the same. wikipedia them for more details.</p>
<p>Hi how do you contact the webmaster?</p>
<p>@cicero109: scroll down and click on "contact us"</p>
<p>College Board's duplicity in the Karen Dillard case borders on criminal. All it had to do was toss out the phrases "cheating" and "invalidate test scores" to the Dallas-area newspapers, and the story bolted onto the front pages (and even on the local TV stations). The reporters at both the Dallas and Fort Worth papers didn't bother to dig deeper. </p>
<p>The thing is, College Board used to sell Karen Dillard (and all the other college prep places around the country) the exact same material that she was accused of illegally acquiring. All of a sudden, "non-profit" College Board decided it was going to corner the market on $elling its $ample tests, and so it cut the supply line to the college prep places. Entirely within their legal rights, of course, but their motives were entirely financial. </p>
<p>I could easily gather about 100 families who would continue to give Karen Dillard the highest recommendation. The program works. Our daughter (who was a student a few years ago, not '08) got a 2350 on the SAT and attends college on a full-ride scholarship. But she spent a lot of time at Karen Dillard and worked hard for nearly two years to attain that.
That's the thing that people miss. Students still have to work hard and put in the time to achieve the kind of SAT results that places like Karen Dillard say are possible.</p>