By Julie Ballance,

This article was also published in Trademark Dec 2001/Jan 2002 and is reproduced on the Findlaw website courtesy of Trade New Zealand.

In the new "knowledge economy", intellectual property rights are taking on a greater significance, and spending time and money to secure appropriate rights for an innovation can be very worthwhile.

Case Study
The experience of Blenheim's Patchett Ag Air Limited shows how intellectual property rights can significantly contribute to success, not only in New Zealand, but overseas. It also illustrates a potentially lucrative concept that is beginning to be given serious consideration in New Zealand - that is the export of intellectual capital.

Ray Patchett, a fixed wing top dressing pilot and director of Patchett Ag Air Ltd, was motivated in the mid 90's to find a solution to a problem that had puzzled him for some time. He knew that if he could come up with a solution, he would revolutionise the world of aerial top-dressing. The problem that Ray sought to solve was how thick suspensions (a mixture of a solid and liquid) instead of powdered fertiliser could be delivered from a top dressing plane without the suspension blocking up the boom and spray lines during flight.

If he could develop a suitable boom system he realised he would be able to offer a number of very attractive products and alternatives to conventional fertilising systems, such as the application of a lime suspension.

Motivation
The application of fertilisers in dust form from a top dressing plane is becoming more environmentally undesirable. In recent years, many countries have introduced legislation that provides guidelines and regulations that local bodies must adhere to in the formulation of their individual air, land, and water plans. In New Zealand, for example, the Resource Management Act 1991 specifies that, for fertilisers and the like, application rates above those recommended are to be classed as contaminants.

Such provisions have led to a need for aerial applicators to improve their spread and accuracy of placement of materials to be applied to pasture or crops. Conventional spraying systems for the application of dry agricultural lime do not comply with the dust emission requirements of New Zealand's Resource Management Act 1991.

Breakthrough
Against this background, and despite being told by several experts in the field that you could never achieve a commercially viable system of delivering suspensions from a fixed wing spray boom, Patchett continued to tackle the issue. Subsequently he developed a spray boom system that uses compressed air lines and self-clearing outlet nozzles along the boom. The system allows a pilot to open and close the nozzles as desired, while not having to worry about the suspension drying out or blocking the lines in the boom. It meant Patchett could deliver very large quantities of a suspension to a field.

Patchett knew he had developed a good system and had to take steps to protect his intellectual property before any details of the invention could be disclosed.


Protection
He subsequently filed patent applications in a number of countries with his technology creating considerable interest throughout the world. Now he has a number of granted patents, including one in the United States.

This year, a US company exercised an option and paid a considerable deposit to buy the rights in the technology for America. Patchett has also entered into some licence agreements in New Zealand with other top dressing operators which involves Patchett Ag Air assembling a spray boom and selling it to an operator, along with a licence to use the spray boom. An annual licence fee is required to maintain the right to use the spray boom.

In New Zealand there have been difficulties with some rivals trying to copy Ray's boom. However, these difficulties often have to be expected when groundbreaking technology is first offered into a market place.

Patchett recognises none of his recent success could have been possible without having secured his patent rights and says: "I would encourage anyone to go down the patent path. We have had to spend money to develop the idea and secure it, [their intellectual property rights] but we haven't spent anything like what we are going to get back."

This is a general summary only and should not be taken as a substitute for specific advice.

Web site: Baldwin Shelston Waters
Email: email@bsw.com