definitions are:

1. What variations may be claimed or covered by the patent consistently
with unity of design.

2. Is a new shape of an article of manufacture, whereby utility is
secured, a subject of protection under this act; and

3. Is mechanical function of any kind covered by it.

As to the first of these questions, it seems to have been assumed that
the design spoken of in all parts of the sections referred to covered a
fixed, unchangeable figure, that the protection of letters patent did
not extend to any variation, however slight, but that such variation
constituted a new design, might be covered by a new patent, and might
safely be used without infringement of the first. This, it is said, is
the correct theory of the law, and has been the uniform adjudication of
the Office.

Neither of these statements is absolutely correct. The law by no means
defines a design with such strictness. The language is, "new and
original design for a manufacture," "new and original impression or
ornament," "new and original shape or configuration." It would seem to
be too plain for argument, that the new design, or impression, or shape,
might be so generic in its character as to admit of many variations,
which should embody the substantial characteristics and be entirely
consistent with a substantial identity of form. Thus, if the invention
were of a design for an ornamental button, the face of which was grooved
with radial rays, it would seem that the first designer of such a button
might properly describe a button of five rays, and, having stated that