http://tags.library.upenn.edu/tag/copyright+academic_exception+elizabeth_townsend PennTags Feed http://tags.library.upenn.edu/makerecord/url/8283 http://tags.library.upenn.edu/makerecord/url/8283 <p>4 Minn. Intell. Prop. Rev. [i] (2002-2003)&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This article explores the future of the teacher exception.&nbsp; It notes that there is a lot of flux in the current academic situation with the advent of digital classrooms and the commercialization of many universities and schools.&nbsp; This article does a very good job exploring the history of the teacher exception and comparing it to the general work for hire doctrine.&nbsp; It discusses the various court cases that formed the basis of the work for hire clause and also the teacher exception.&nbsp; It also takes a look at the creation of the current&nbsp;1976 Copyright Act that defined in very clear terms the work for hire clause and also according to some interpretations eliminated any form of the teacher exception.&nbsp; After evaluating most of these cases the author comes to the conclusion that the teacher exception is still alive, but only because of tradition.&nbsp; The two most recent cases, Hays v Sony&nbsp;and Weinstein v UIllinois&nbsp;have allowed the teacher exception to persist, but neither judge made any kind of definitive ruling on it.&nbsp; This means that the teacher exception could be eliminated very easily by a strict interpretation of the Copyright Act.&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Given the precarious nature of the teacher exception the author sees it&nbsp;atrophying, particularly as more and more schools expand into the digital age and want to control how content is available to their students regardless of the intentions of the teacher.&nbsp; The author looks at another article (Who Owns Course Materials Prepared by a Teacher or Professor?&nbsp; The Application of Copyright Law to Teaching Materials in the Internet Age by Holmes and Levin) <a href="http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:8120/login.aspx?direct=true&amp;db=keh&amp;an=2919775">http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:8120/login.aspx?direct=true&amp;db=keh&amp;an=2919775</a> (also tagged) that argues for the teacher exception and evaluates their arguments.&nbsp; After finding several new arguments&nbsp;against their reasoning in light of recent developments&nbsp;the author&nbsp;comes to the conclusion that the teacher exception is in danger of being eliminated simply because in today&rsquo;s society there has finally emerged a way for universities to profit from professor&rsquo;s lecture notes, where twenty years ago there wasn&rsquo;t.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This means that for Mauro v Allentown the case supporting Mauro&rsquo;s statement that he owns the medley is weakening by the climate of the times, however there is nothing yet that has clearly removed the teacher exception as a valid argument.&nbsp; So for the time being pushing forward with the case could be justified, but the author of this article, at least, sees that window of opportunity rapidly closing.</p>