4 Minn. Intell. Prop. Rev. [i] (2002-2003) 

     This article explores the future of the teacher exception.  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.  This article does a very good job exploring the history of the teacher exception and comparing it to the general work for hire doctrine.  It discusses the various court cases that formed the basis of the work for hire clause and also the teacher exception.  It also takes a look at the creation of the current 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.  After evaluating most of these cases the author comes to the conclusion that the teacher exception is still alive, but only because of tradition.  The two most recent cases, Hays v Sony and Weinstein v UIllinois have allowed the teacher exception to persist, but neither judge made any kind of definitive ruling on it.  This means that the teacher exception could be eliminated very easily by a strict interpretation of the Copyright Act. 

     Given the precarious nature of the teacher exception the author sees it 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.  The author looks at another article (Who Owns Course Materials Prepared by a Teacher or Professor?  The Application of Copyright Law to Teaching Materials in the Internet Age by Holmes and Levin) http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:8120/login.aspx?direct=true&db=keh&an=2919775 (also tagged) that argues for the teacher exception and evaluates their arguments.  After finding several new arguments against their reasoning in light of recent developments the author comes to the conclusion that the teacher exception is in danger of being eliminated simply because in today’s society there has finally emerged a way for universities to profit from professor’s lecture notes, where twenty years ago there wasn’t.

     This means that for Mauro v Allentown the case supporting Mauro’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.  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.