[xcasex]

Hello. The way that works, you have to infer the existence of A for the existence of B and the existence of B for the existence of A.

Direct copies only work as an argument if the item is an Original, as in the idea of a thing wholly onto itself without an external influence of any sort.

you might argue that it's derived as in Originated from, borrowed from, a sourced to, an antecedent of, an allusion towards. I could continue. sort of like how Star Wars Episode II and Star Wars Episode I are derived from Star Wars Episode IV. :)

[EwanToo]

Star Wars Episode 1 and 2 contain exact characters and other creative designs from Episode 4/5/6.

Not "like" them, not derivative of them, but actually them (e.g. Yoda).

So yeah, that would be a direct copy.

[xcasex]

It would actually be a derivative of ep VI, since the characters and creative designs differ and precede it.

A direct copy, would be the _exact_same_ characters as depicted in ep VI, but alas they are not, they are however similar to, which makes it a derivative of.

[jerf]

Judges, the people who arbitrate copyright disputes in the end, are humans, not computer programs. I don't think that if you tried to rip off Yoda, but made slight alterations to his face wrinkles, that you're going to convince a judge that it's something other than Yoda. A judge is not going to see Yoda as anything other than the same character through all six movies, no matter how many differences between the 3D model in the Phantom Menace and the 3D model in Attack of the Clones a "diff" command might find.