Page:Daniel Schrock v. Learning Curve International, Inc. 7th Cir. 08-1296.djvu/21

 The leading treatise on copyright law confirms this basic understanding. “[T]he right to claim copyright in a noninfringing derivative work arises by operation of law, not through authority  from the  copyright owner  of the underlying work.” 1  § 3.06, at 3-34.34. We have cited Nimmer with approval on this point. See Liu, 302 F.3d at 755. As we noted in Liu, however, there is  an  important  proviso  explained  in  the treatise: “[I]f the pertinent agreement between the parties affirmatively bars the  licensee from obtaining copyright protection even in a licensed derivative work, that contractual provision would appear to govern.’&thinsp;” 1 § 3.06, at 3-34.34; see also Liu, 302 F.3d at 755.

On this point Liu is instructive. Price Waterhouse LLP owned the copyright to a computer-software program, and Yang, an employee, was asked to help recruit a Chinese computer programmer to increase the  speed of the program. Liu, 302 F.3d at 751. Yang became concerned that if the Chinese programmer was successful, Price Waterhouse might exclude her from future Chinese ventures. To allay these concerns, Price Waterhouse entered into a series of letter agreements with Yang specifying a payment schedule for benchmark