Are there universities that consider it academic misconduct for students to publish material created by faculty? Please read the bold text before answering.

A colleague has shown me that one of his students has posted exam questions with answers , and prior assignments with answers to a commercial web site intended to communicate such material to other students.  Sadly, I am the chair of the university's Honor Council and the question of whether these actions rise to the level of academic misconduct has landed in my lap.

Also sadly, I am ill-equipped to have an opinion.  Almost every assignment I've given in the last ten years is available on the public web and I return assignments with critiques.  I give pen-and-paper tests and return them to the students, then go over the questions and give the correct answers in class.  There are thousands of copies of my old exams around, many of them with answers that were either correct to begin with or corrected post facto.  I am sure there are fat binders in fraternity and sorority houses with that material.

I can get all legalistic and ask, "Well... did you tell him not to do that?"  In fact, I am in the process of finding that out.  I am pretty sure that widespread commercial distribution of questions with answers is bad.  My concern is whether contributing this information to such a web site rises to the level of academic misconduct.

So, here is a question that has an answer rather than leading to discussion: Are there universities that prohibit students from contributing material created by the faculty, such as exams or assignments, to commercial web sites the purpose of which is supplying that material to other students?  If so, how is that prohibition worded and how is it enforced?

September 10: This has been edited by several people, and several people have added tags.  I've just edited it myself to remove the word "cheaters" from the description of the commercial web sites involved in this case, and which are in general the subject of the question.  I've also deleted most of the tags, leaving only "ethics" and "policy."

November 15: Thanks for the responses.  After a certain amount of back and forth, my institution has adopted the following (voluntary) syllabus language: "Some lecture slides, notes, or exercises used in this course may be the property of the textbook publisher or other third parties. All other course material, including but not limited to slides developed by the instructor(s), the syllabus, assignments, course notes, course recordings (whether audio or video) and examinations or quizzes are the property of the University or of the individual instructor who developed them. Students are free to use this material for study and learning, and for discussion with others, including those who may not be in this class, unless the instructor imposes more stringent requirements. Republishing or redistributing this material, including uploading it to web sites or linking to it through services like iTunes, violates the rights of the copyright holder and is prohibited. There are civil and criminal penalties for copyright violation. Publishing or redistributing this material in a way that might give others an unfair advantage in this or future courses may subject you to penalties for academic misconduct." [emphasis in the original]

December 8, 2017: I just received a request from someone at another institution to use the language above.  Although it was adopted by my institution, I wrote it, and I now contribute it to the public domain.  Use it as-is or modified, with no need to attribute it or otherwise give credit.
Since you asked for norms at other schools, here is one data point: UC Berkeley has an explicit policy on this subject.  At UC Berkeley, instructors own the copyright on their course materials and are allowed to specify the policy on dissemination.  In additional, dissemination for a commercial purpose is prohibited without express consent of the instructor.  If instructors specify a policy, students who violate this policy can be punished for academic misconduct -- and this is stated explicitly in the UC Berkeley policies.

In more detail, UC Berkeley's policy on Course Note-Taking and Materials states:


  Individual instructors retain copyrights to [...] class materials they create.  Instructors may permit, limit, or prohibit the [..] further distribution of class materials created by an instructor (class notes, recordings, exams, and class materials, collectively referred to as “Class
  Materials”).  Instructors are encouraged to clearly communicate their preferences on recording and sharing Class Materials in their syllabi. [...]
  
  Unauthorized use of Class Materials may subject an individual to legal proceedings brought by the instructor as well as disciplinary and legal proceedings by the University. [...]


Thus, if an instructor states in the syllabus that dissemination of exams is not allowed, then a student who violates that restriction may be disciplined by the University for academic misconduct.  On the other hand, if the instructor does not state any policy, and the students shares the exam with others (for non-commercial purposes), there is no violation of University academic misconduct rules, though there might well be a violation of copyright law.

Also, UC Berkeley's Code of Student Conduct has a section that deals specifically with this subject.  It states:


  102.23 Course Materials
  
  Selling, preparing, or distributing for any commercial purpose course lecture notes or video or audio recordings of any course unless authorized by the University in advance and explicitly permitted by the course instructor in writing. The unauthorized sale or commercial distribution of course notes or
  recordings by a student is a violation of these Policies whether or not it was the student or someone else who prepared the notes or recordings.
  
  Copying for any commercial purpose handouts, readers or other course materials provided by an instructor as part of a University of California course unless authorized by the University in advance and explicitly permitted by the course instructor or the copyright holder in writing (if the instructor is not the copyright holder).


Exams count as course materials and thus are covered by this policy.



Personal opinion: I think sites like CourseHero are scummy, sleazy sites: the worst of the worst.  They require students to submit additional course materials to view the ones that are on record there, and they make no attempt to validate that students have permission to share those course materials; indeed, they have every incentive not to validate whether the student has authorization, and every incentive to encourage unauthorized uploading.  Thus, their business model is based upon encouraging students to share stuff they might not have permission to -- and they profit off of this.  I find this business practice reprehensible and worth of condemnation.

However... it is a separate question whether student use of those sites constitutes academic misconduct.  Personally, I would say that students have a due process right to be informed of their responsibilities, and to only be published for actions that are a clear violation of published policies.  Therefore, I believe it is the instructors' responsibility to establish clear policies -- either on a course-by-course basis, on course syllabi, or else by adopting clear policies at the campus level.  In the absence of such policies, I would be very hesitant to punish students who shared exams with others.  That does not feel fair to me.