independent foreign manufacturer be removed from the purview of the statute." 149
Although settling the inter-circuit conflict about the validity of the customs regulations, the Court's decision continued to manifest deeper doubts about the relationship between the public interest in trademark protection and trademark owners' interest in sheltering expected returns on their investments. While Brennan and his camp had viewed section 526 as consistent with an intent to preserve trademarks' role as "a device to protect the public against fraud by properly identifying the product's manufacturer, not a device to protect the trademark owner against competing sales of its own goods," 150 Scalia had conceived of a trademark owner's "investment" as equivalent to "the entire goodwill" associated with the mark. 151 The basic ambivalence in the nature of trademark protection reflected in these two opinions had endured since the early days of American trademark law and, it seemed, would continue to characterize future parallel importation cases, whether decided under trademark infringement theories or under new interpretations of section 526.