Der aus Quakenbrück (Münsterland) gebürtige Jurist Heinrich Friedrich Wilhelm André (1827 – 1903), von 1874 bis 1896 Oberbürgermeister der sächsischen Industriemetropole Chemnitz, hat wesentlichen Anteil an der Schaffung des deutschen Reichspatentgesetzes. In Zusammenarbeit mit Werner Siemens und unterstützt durch einen speziellen Ausschuss des VDI konnte zunächst ein „Entwurf eines Patentgesetzes für das Deutsche Reich“ erstellt werden Dieser regelte den Gegenstand des Patentschutzes und das Erteilungsverfahren, die Aufgaben der Patentbehörden (Patentamt und Reichsoberhandelsgericht) sowie mögliche Rechtsstreitigkeiten. Die Vorlage dieses Entwurfs auf der Patentkonferenz auf der Wiener Weltausstellung (1873) unter Vorsitz von Dr. Charles William Siemens, einem der Siemens-Brüder, beförderte die baldige internationale Verständigung über den Patentschutz. Im Mai 1874 erfolgte daraufhin die Gründung des Deutschen Patentschutzvereins, gefolgt vom Erlass des Markenschutzgesetzes und des Musterschutzgesetzes (1876). 1876 veröffentlichte der Verein den Entwurf für ein Deutsches Patentgesetz. Nachdem die Landesregierungen ihr Einverständnis erklärt hatten, die kaiserlichen Genehmigungen sowie die Billigung von Bundesrat und Reichstag vorlagen, wurde das Gesetz und am 25. Mai 1877 schließlich verkündet. Am 1. Juli 1877 trat das 45 Paragraphen umfassende Gesetzeswerk in Kraft. Dr. André engagierte sich auch fürderhin in Sachen Patentwesen und Gesetzeswerk, nahm wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen vor und sorgte für juristische Präzisierung und Vervollständigung, so dass am 7. April 1891 ein neues Patentgesetz erlassen werden konnte. In Anerkennung dieser Leistungen urteilte das amerikanische Journal of the Patent Office Society: „It can not be gainsaid that the German patent system was the finest in the world.“ / The jurist André Heinrich Friedrich Wilhelm (1827 - 1903), born in Quakenbrück (Münsterland) and from 1874 to 1896 Lord Mayor of the industrial city of Chemnitz, Saxony, played a major role in the creation of the Patent Law of the German Reich. In collaboration with Werner Siemens and supported by a special committee of the VDI at first he drew up a "Draft Patent Law for the German Reich". It regulated the subject of patent protection and the granting procedure, the tasks of the patent office (Patent Office and the Reich Chief Commercial Court) and possible litigation. The presentation of this draft at the Vienna World Exhibition Conference (1873) under the chairmanship of Dr. Charles William Siemens, one of the Siemens brothers, promoted the upcoming national and international understanding of patent protection. The German Patent Protection Association was founded in May 1874. It was followed by the enactment of the Trademark Act and the Design Protection Act (1876). In 1876 the Association published a draft of a German patent law. After the regional governments had given their consent, there were royal approvals and the approval of the Bundesrat and the Reichstag. The law was announced on 25th of May 1877. On 1st July 1877 the comprehensive piece of legislation with 45 paragraphs came into force. From then onwards Andre was also involved in matters regarding the patent system and its legislation, undertook scientific studies and provided legal clarification and completion. On 7th of April 1891 a new patent law was adopted. In recognition of this achievment the Journal of the American Patent Society Office acclaimed: "It can not be gainsaid that the German patent system was the finest in the world."

This thesis examines the historical development and current state of amendment law in the Australian patent system. Initial research on modern amendment cases immediately showed that the confused, inconsistent and complex state of the law is a significant problem. There is a plethora of different analytical tools and legal tests being applied to assess an amendment, yet they were developed in a different area of patent law, that of fair basing. Such tools and tests are ill equipped to provide any real assistance to decision-makers faced with assessing an amendment. In fact, they seem to lead decision-makers away from applying the correct investigation as set out in the amendment provisions of the legislation. The thesis examines the history of amendment law so as to place its discussion of the current problems in context and provide a better understanding of why the problems arose. Four major events are discussed in the thesis. Together, these events have shaped Australian amendment law over the past century: (i) the development and introduction of the “substantially larger than or substantially different from” test into the British and Australian statutory amendment provisions; (ii) the development and introduction of the concept of fair basing into British and Australian patent law; (iii) the development and introduction of the modern British and Australian statutory test for amendments and the tiered amendment scheme; and (iv) the analogies drawn in modern British and Australian cases between fair basing and amendment that ultimately led to fair basing tests being cross-applied in Australia to assess the allowability of amendments. The thesis shows how the very harsh early British treatment of requests for amendment ultimately led to statutory change. It also locates, for the first time, the common law origins of the notion of “fair basing.” The 1949 British legislation implemented a new and different statutory test that was intended to liberalise the whole area of amendment law. It also added the requirement of “fair basing” into the legislation. However, the thesis shows that this last development occurred via well-intentioned legislators with a significant misunderstanding of patent law. The notion of fair basing injected a great deal of uncertainty into an area of law that was previously settled. Theoretically, and in practical application, it caused problems. Then, when decision-makers sought guidance on the new amendment provision, they applied the tests developed in fair basing cases to assess amendments, with the consequent deleterious effects. The Australian experience largely mirrored the British experience until 1977 when the British Act changed. The significance of the thesis is that it clearly demonstrates that the currently accepted dogma – that fair basing is equivalent to the “in substance disclosure” statutory test for amendments, so fair basing tests can be used to assess amendment – is unsound. The thesis isolates the problems inherent in the dogma and the examination of relevant case law confirms the main hypothesis that the current approach should be rejected. It simply operates to the prejudice of inventors, their competitors, the public and the patent system itself. Most importantly, the thesis shows that reform is urgently needed. Some possibilities for reform are suggested.

Ein Jahr nach Gründung des Kaiserlichen Patentamts in Berlin 1878 wurde Chemnitz eine der ersten Patentauslegestellen in Deutschland. In den folgenden Jahrzehnten lag die Zahl der Patentanmeldungen in Chemnitz dann stets weit über dem Durchschnitt vergleichbarer Städte im Reich. Diese historischen Ereignisse und die besondere Rolle, die der damalige Oberbürgermeister André spielte, gaben im Jahr 1997, zum 120. Jahrestag der Gesetzgebung, den Anlass für eine von der Technischen Universität Chemnitz, unter meiner Leitung organisierte und durch die Stadt Chemnitz finanzierte Tagung zum Thema "Patentschutz und Innovation in Geschichte und Gegenwart“.

Im Rahmen der Jubliäen 175 Jahre Technische Universität Chemnitz und 100 Jahre Neues Rathaus in Chemnitz veranstaltete die Bibliothek der Technischen Universität Chemnitz und die Bürgerinitiative "André-Ehrung", vertreten durch die Gesellschaft der Freunde der TU Chemnitz, am 19. Mai 2011 das Kolloquium "Dr. jur. Wilhelm André und das erste deutsche Patentgesetz". Im Mittelpunkt des Kolloquiums stand die Zusammenarbeit zwischen Dr. Werner von Siemens und Dr. Wilhelm André bei der Bearbeitung des ersten deutschen Reichspatentgesetzes von 1877. Herr Dr. Seifert, Oberbürgermeister der Stadt Chemnitz von 1993 bis 2006, eröffnete als Vorsitzender der Gesellschaft der Freunde der TU Chemnitz die Veranstaltung. Herr Dr. Richter übernahm die Moderation des Kolloquiums.

Der aus Quakenbrück (Münsterland) gebürtige Jurist Heinrich Friedrich Wilhelm André (1827 – 1903), von 1874 bis 1896 Oberbürgermeister der sächsischen Industriemetropole Chemnitz, hat wesentlichen Anteil an der Schaffung des deutschen Reichspatentgesetzes. In Zusammenarbeit mit Werner Siemens und unterstützt durch einen speziellen Ausschuss des VDI konnte zunächst ein „Entwurf eines Patentgesetzes für das Deutsche Reich“ erstellt werden Dieser regelte den Gegenstand des Patentschutzes und das Erteilungsverfahren, die Aufgaben der Patentbehörden (Patentamt und Reichsoberhandelsgericht) sowie mögliche Rechtsstreitigkeiten. Die Vorlage dieses Entwurfs auf der Patentkonferenz auf der Wiener Weltausstellung (1873) unter Vorsitz von Dr. Charles William Siemens, einem der Siemens-Brüder, beförderte die baldige internationale Verständigung über den Patentschutz. Im Mai 1874 erfolgte daraufhin die Gründung des Deutschen Patentschutzvereins, gefolgt vom Erlass des Markenschutzgesetzes und des Musterschutzgesetzes (1876). 1876 veröffentlichte der Verein den Entwurf für ein Deutsches Patentgesetz. Nachdem die Landesregierungen ihr Einverständnis erklärt hatten, die kaiserlichen Genehmigungen sowie die Billigung von Bundesrat und Reichstag vorlagen, wurde das Gesetz und am 25. Mai 1877 schließlich verkündet. Am 1. Juli 1877 trat das 45 Paragraphen umfassende Gesetzeswerk in Kraft. Dr. André engagierte sich auch fürderhin in Sachen Patentwesen und Gesetzeswerk, nahm wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen vor und sorgte für juristische Präzisierung und Vervollständigung, so dass am 7. April 1891 ein neues Patentgesetz erlassen werden konnte. In Anerkennung dieser Leistungen urteilte das amerikanische Journal of the Patent Office Society: „It can not be gainsaid that the German patent system was the finest in the world.“ / The jurist André Heinrich Friedrich Wilhelm (1827 - 1903), born in Quakenbrück (Münsterland) and from 1874 to 1896 Lord Mayor of the industrial city of Chemnitz, Saxony, played a major role in the creation of the Patent Law of the German Reich. In collaboration with Werner Siemens and supported by a special committee of the VDI at first he drew up a "Draft Patent Law for the German Reich". It regulated the subject of patent protection and the granting procedure, the tasks of the patent office (Patent Office and the Reich Chief Commercial Court) and possible litigation. The presentation of this draft at the Vienna World Exhibition Conference (1873) under the chairmanship of Dr. Charles William Siemens, one of the Siemens brothers, promoted the upcoming national and international understanding of patent protection. The German Patent Protection Association was founded in May 1874. It was followed by the enactment of the Trademark Act and the Design Protection Act (1876). In 1876 the Association published a draft of a German patent law. After the regional governments had given their consent, there were royal approvals and the approval of the Bundesrat and the Reichstag. The law was announced on 25th of May 1877. On 1st July 1877 the comprehensive piece of legislation with 45 paragraphs came into force. From then onwards Andre was also involved in matters regarding the patent system and its legislation, undertook scientific studies and provided legal clarification and completion. On 7th of April 1891 a new patent law was adopted. In recognition of this achievment the Journal of the American Patent Society Office acclaimed: "It can not be gainsaid that the German patent system was the finest in the world."

The government has indicated that innovation fosters economic growth and is essential to maintaining a competitive position in international markets. Patents are the preferred mechanism by which the Australian Government and other governments encourage their nationals to protect their innovations. The question of the entitlement was raised in several cases in the Federal Court of Australia where there has been a failure to name all of the inventors on a patent grant (non-joinder) or where persons were mis-named as inventors, who were not and consequently have no interest in a grant (rnis-joinder). In both cases, parties who were not themselves daiming an entitlement to the invention, brought objections based on a number of grounds, including entitlement. The results have been the revocation of the patent in the case on the non-joinder of an inventor and in the case of mis-joinder, the preliminary view of a judge of the Federal Court has been, that the patent would be invalid through lack of entitlement. The result is that competitors are permitted to 'exploit' the invention, as the subject matter is not protected by a patent. The implications are far reaching, For example, where a research team in collaboration with another develops an invention but omits the inventive contribution of even one member of one team or includes a person who has not made an inventive contribution in the patent grant, the patent will be invalid. In these circumstances, the author considers that the result produces a disincentive to innovate. Consideration of this area in other jurisdictions reveals that the U.S. and the U.K. have recognised this as an unsatisfactory state of affairs. As a result, Congress in the U.S. made provision in their Patent Code in the early 1950's, that in the case of error or mistake giving rise to a non-joinder or mis-joinder of inventors, the patent would not be invalid but could be rectified by the Director of Patents and Trade Marks (the 'Director'). In the U.K., the Comptroller has powers to deal with a wide variety of cases involving entitlement to ownership of a patent. The situations include but are not limited to cases where some but not all of the persons entitled to the grant have been granted the patent, i.e. non-joinder, or where a person entitled to be granted a patent, has been granted a patent together with a person who is not entitled, i.e. mis-joinder. The thesis will focus on the non-joinder and mis-joinder of inventors, but the U.K. provision addresses a wider field of parties entitled, whether entitled as inventors or on some other basis. In addition, the U.K. and Germany have made provision restricting the persons who are able to challenge a patent on entitlement grounds. This is restricted to those persons having an interest in the patent, rather than open to any person, as is the case in Australia. The Australian decisions have been determined on historic cases dating back to the 17th century. It is timely to consider amendments which will overcome revocation of patents under Australian law, for what is essentially a matter between the persons interested. These amendments will accordingly encourage innovation, particularly in an environment where intellectual property has taken on greater importance and where the identification of the inventor has become more complex as collaborations in research become more common.

Im Rahmen der Jubliäen 175 Jahre Technische Universität Chemnitz und 100 Jahre Neues Rathaus in Chemnitz veranstaltete die Bibliothek der Technischen Universität Chemnitz und die Bürgerinitiative "André-Ehrung", vertreten durch die Gesellschaft der Freunde der TU Chemnitz, am 19. Mai 2011 das Kolloquium "Dr. jur. Wilhelm André und das erste deutsche Patentgesetz". Im Mittelpunkt des Kolloquiums stand die Zusammenarbeit zwischen Dr. Werner von Siemens und Dr. Wilhelm André bei der Bearbeitung des ersten deutschen Reichspatentgesetzes von 1877. Herr Dr. Seifert, Oberbürgermeister der Stadt Chemnitz von 1993 bis 2006, eröffnete als Vorsitzender der Gesellschaft der Freunde der TU Chemnitz die Veranstaltung. Herr Dr. Richter übernahm die Moderation des Kolloquiums.

Ein Jahr nach Gründung des Kaiserlichen Patentamts in Berlin 1878 wurde Chemnitz eine der ersten Patentauslegestellen in Deutschland. In den folgenden Jahrzehnten lag die Zahl der Patentanmeldungen in Chemnitz dann stets weit über dem Durchschnitt vergleichbarer Städte im Reich. Diese historischen Ereignisse und die besondere Rolle, die der damalige Oberbürgermeister André spielte, gaben im Jahr 1997, zum 120. Jahrestag der Gesetzgebung, den Anlass für eine von der Technischen Universität Chemnitz, unter meiner Leitung organisierte und durch die Stadt Chemnitz finanzierte Tagung zum Thema "Patentschutz und Innovation in Geschichte und Gegenwart“.