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. The methodology is grounded in a published 61-entry citation catalogue that readers and auditors are free to interrogate.
How It Works Across the Stack
The four layers are a dependency chain, not a menu. You cannot control what you have not defined, and you cannot evidence a control you never built. Most engagements enter at layer three and stop there — which is why the evidence still gets assembled by hand the week before the audit. Enter wherever your pain is sharpest; the work is making the layers beneath it hold.
Visibility
Define what you expose. 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
Structure it so the definition holds. 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
Enforce it as a control. 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
Evidence that it held. The cross-cutting discipline that makes every other layer board-defensible. NSW DOI eliminated 90%+ of audit preparation time because the evidence trail was a by-product of the build, not a document assembled afterwards.
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, architecting and operationalising RISKflo's GRC platform for deployment at HSBC and leading RISKflo to ISO/IEC 27001 certification in 2025. 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
What you are buying: a service engagement, not a platform. The controls ship into your repository, your pipeline, and your evidence trail — you own them and you run them. There is no licence to renew and no seat to buy, so there is no incentive to scope the work around software you would be locked into.
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.
Does NETEVO sell a platform or a product?
No. NETEVO delivers service engagements only. The controls, pipelines, and evidence trails are built into your own infrastructure and you own them outright: there is no licence to renew, no seats to buy, and nothing hosted by NETEVO that you log into. That also means there is no commercial incentive to scope an engagement around software you would be locked into.
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.