Education Lawyer neglects to mention that he is (or at least, appears to be, based on the email address his account is registered under, and a little bit of research) George Mentz. It's also interesting to note that George Mentz, whether or not he is Education Lawyer, does not appear to have the "arms length" arrangement with the organizations that he says are his "clients" or are "represented" by him. I don't know of any other corporate counsel that is the named registrant of his clients' domain names. As for the arguments, I don't think they refute anything said above. Yes, there are legitimate certification groups who essentially attest to the experience/legitimacy of a given person's credentials. However, RFValve's experience, while it's remotely possibly it was anomalous, indicates that no actual validation of credentials was occurring. Also, as others have pointed out, at least some of the organizations in question have names confusingly similar to older, more well established credentialing organizations. This does not enhance an argument that they are seeking to provide a legitimate service. There are lots of unwonderful schools that have made analogous arguments about their programs to the arguments being made here. I don't think the arguments have any more weight for certification agencies than they do for schools, other than the fact there's no "gold standard" (such as regional accreditation is for schools), that exists for certification agencies. In short, while the idea of certification agencies is not inherently bad, absent a rigorous process of evaluating potential certificants, and some sort of recognized oversight of organizations claiming to provide such services, it is nearly impossible to determine whether a given certification organization is actually providing a meaningful service that employers can rely on, or simply acting as a credential mill that will hand certifications to anyone based on whatever they claim.