The Law-to-Code Methodology
Every engagement starts with the same rigour applied to patent claims: identify the constraints, define the defensible position, engineer the solution, document the evidence. That's why our attribution goes into prospectuses, our platforms pass banking audits, and our content operations survive board scrutiny.
Why This Methodology Exists
Most consultants pick a lane: strategy or execution, legal or technical, marketing or engineering. The result is solutions that work in one dimension but fail under the scrutiny of another. An SEO strategy that can't survive a board challenge. A platform architecture that can't satisfy auditors. Content operations that scale but can't prove ROI.
The law-to-code methodology exists because digital infrastructure faces the same challenge as a patent claim: it must be precisely defined, defensible under examination, and reproducible in practice. A patent claim that's vague gets rejected. A governance framework that's vague gets ignored. The discipline is identical; the domain is different.
How It Works Across the Stack
Visibility
Revenue attribution built with evidentiary rigour. MoneyMe's $208M organic demand figure went directly into their ASX prospectus, not because it was impressive, but because the methodology made it defensible under investor scrutiny.
Content Operations
Governed publishing systems where content models, taxonomies, and editorial workflows are documented with patent-specification precision. Sheridan's $10.78M in attributed revenue was measurable because the content operations were structured, not chaotic.
Platform & Agent Infrastructure
Policy-as-code that turns compliance requirements into executable controls. RISKflo's 99%+ uptime at HSBC exists because governance was architectural: event-sourced, immutable, auditable, not a checkbox exercise layered on after the fact.
Governance
The cross-cutting methodology that makes every other layer board-defensible. Whether it's search visibility for a prospectus, content operations for a retail board, or platform infrastructure for a banking regulator: the rigour is the same.
Gregory McKenzie
Registered patent and trade marks attorney. Systems architect. 20+ years delivering for listed brands, global banks, and national retailers.
Gregory started as an engineer at BHP, then completed his Master of Industrial Property while qualifying as a patent attorney at Griffith Hack. That dual foundation — engineering rigour and IP law — shaped everything that followed. He built and commercialised a patented IP monitoring platform (US 9,280,798) used by BHP, Woodside, and other major enterprises for over a decade, delivered digital marketing and SEO for brands including Optus, Fairfax, and NRMA, and served as contract CIO for RISKflo, extending and operationalising the GRC platform at HSBC while achieving ISO 27001 compliance. NETEVO exists to apply that combined discipline — platform architecture, SDLC governance, revenue attribution, and AI readiness — at principal level.
The result is the law-to-code methodology: where regulatory requirements become executable controls, where attribution survives board scrutiny, and where governance accelerates delivery instead of blocking it.
Qualifications
- Registered Trans-Tasman Patent and Trade Marks Attorney
- Master of Industrial Property, Law (UTS)
- Bachelor of Engineering - Metallurgical & Process Engineering (UNSW)
Patents
- AU 2011101522 — Rank Score methodology for Share of Voice measurement
- US 9,280,798 — Competitive landscape visualization and IP document review systems
Publications
- The Art of IP War (2009) — Strategic intellectual property protection and enforcement
What this means for clients:
- IPO-ready SEO programs with prospectus-grade attribution (MoneyMe, OFX)
- Platform governance at global banking scale (RISKflo at HSBC)
- Board-ready revenue attribution for national retailers (Sheridan, $10.78M)
- Governed data platforms for state government (NSW DOI)
- Patented IP platform used by BHP, Woodside for 10+ years
- Digital marketing and SEO for Optus, Fairfax, NRMA
Sydney-based, serving ANZ/APAC organisations with board-level accountability. 3-6 month engagements. $80K-$250K AUD. No junior bench.
Proof Across the Stack
Common Questions
What is the law-to-code methodology?
The law-to-code methodology applies the same rigour used in patent claims to digital infrastructure. Every engagement starts with identifying constraints, defining a defensible position, engineering the solution, and documenting the evidence. This is why our attribution goes into ASX prospectuses and our platforms pass banking audits.
Why does a patent attorney build digital infrastructure?
A patent attorney's core skill is defining something novel precisely enough to be protected, reproduced, and defended under examination. That same discipline — translating complex requirements into precise, executable specifications — is exactly what's missing in most digital infrastructure. Regulatory requirements become executable controls, not wiki documents.
What makes NETEVO different from Big 4 digital consulting?
Big 4 firms typically charge $1-2M+ and take 12-18 months for discovery alone. NETEVO delivers in 3-6 months at $80K-$250K because the same principal who defines the strategy also architects and builds the solution. No handoff layers, no junior bench, no slideware.
How does governance accelerate delivery instead of blocking it?
Most organisations treat governance as a gate that blocks releases. The law-to-code methodology encodes governance as automated infrastructure: policy-as-code that accelerates CI/CD pipelines instead of requiring manual approval. RISKflo achieved 99%+ uptime at HSBC precisely because governance was architectural, not procedural.
Ready for Governance-Native Digital Infrastructure?
A short call to understand your mandate and share what's realistic. No pitch theatre, just straight answers from a patent attorney who builds systems.