[swGooF]

I don't know if that has ever been tested in court. Most universities are accepting (or even encouraging) of professors to share materials online. However, sharing materials online and making money off course materials are 2 different things. Currently, I would say professor because he/she is free to take course materials when switching universities.

[droithomme]

Actually there's extensive case history on this topic. In the US where I'm familiar with it, most generally, books and course materials produced by professors while employed are not considered work for hire. Research results such as patents coming from work done in university research labs are much more likely to be considered work for hire. It depends a lot on the contract the professor has agreed to though.

Pro professor citations:

http://www.aaup.org/NR/exeres/517C85B6-CC13-4A47-AE3E-5C1763...

> Generally, faculty scholarly work is not considered work-for-hire. "[I]t has been the prevailing academic practice to treat the faculty member as the copyright owner of works that are created independently and at the faculty member's own initiative for traditional academic purposes." Statement on Copyright, AAUP Policy Documents & Reports 182 (9th ed. 2001).

More generally Pro-university or ambiguous citations:

http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/copyright-ownership/...

More neutral legal analysis of concepts:

http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/owner.pdf