33 is the exercise of a right possessed by all - and in the free exercise of which the consuming public is deeply interested'... To allow a State by use of its law of unfair competition to prevent the copying of an article which represents too slight an advance to be patented would be to permit the State to block off from the public something which federal law has said belongs to the public." What the Court decided was a constitutional question. It did not deal at all with the question whether Sears's conduct amounted to unfair competition. The case has therefore no bearing on the present problem. The way in which unfair copying had been dealt with in Western European countries is of interest