I have dealt with the issues outlined in this chapter and the Kranch article for many years. My company is a partnership (so I have a share in the company) that provides intellectual capital for hire. On my first day, I was required to disclose intellectual work that I had in progress and sign Non-Disclosure and Non-compete documents.
As a military instructor, the content was provided and personalized by the instructor, but after the military, I developed content, and it was delivered by my company to the government. In some cases, we delivered the instruction, but in many cases, the government chooses to have lower cost companies hire instructors to deliver (and in some cases recompile) our content. It can be stressful and painful for the developer and teacher.
I have often been part of a "team" sometimes as the leader, instructor or SME and at other times I would fill other roles such as the development of the learning task analysis (the Navy refers to these as a Job Duty Task Analysis) or preliminary ISD functions. On occasion, I have developed specific content which was incorporated into larger lessons. I did not think of these issues as intellectual property, but that would be an accurate concept.
Neither source discussed persistent or inheritable relationships such printed materials as royalties or broadcast residuals. If faculty are "member of a team" and educational institution retains ownership of intellectual property, then a lecture is rebroadcast should they be paid for each event.
Like the residuals that became a fixture of television and the movie world, I suspect that academics should be proactive about this issue before a time comes when the teacher delivers a course one, but the college reuses it semester after semester without providing remuneration.