Graham Roper holds a patent for a method and system of providing emergency assistance by transmitting information to a cellphone user by text message.
He had received legal advice that his patent was so broad it basically meant anyone who wanted to systematically transmit instructions via cellphone during an emergency needed permission from him, Mr Roper said.
He understood the idea was so simple it was difficult to grasp the concept someone could own it, he said.
In the past four years, he had lobbied mayors, emergency service providers, government departments and politicians in an attempt to get them to use his invention, but had been rejected, the former paramedic said.
"I've been told for so long it'll never work and they're not interested."
When he read in the Otago Daily Times that police, as part of wider work, were testing the feasibility of an emergency text system, he was upset he had not been consulted.
He said he was "just an ordinary guy" who had spent tens of thousands of dollars pursuing an idea, developing it and protecting it.
He had, on several occasions, spoken to New Zealand Police about such a system only to be told it was not a possibility.
"I just thought they could have been fair and reasonable and talked to me.
"For want of better words, I thought of it first and I'm just looking for some recognition."
Professor of Law at the University of Otago John Smillie said he taught the basic principles of patents as a part of a paper on intellectual property.
The idea of an emergency text warning system in itself was not patentable as it was neither novel nor inventive, but if it was implemented using a device such as a computer to send out the messages, then it could be deemed as inventive and was therefore patentable.
Raw data or abstract schemes were not patentable, he said.
Mr Roper said he had not licensed any company to use the emergency text system.
One company claimed to provide an emergency text system which civil defence teams from seven councils across the country had signed up for, but he understood the company could only send generic messages such as "Listen to your radio".
It was not legally entitled to send specific emergency information such as situation updates or instructions where to evacuate to, he said.
"My concern is that they are misrepresenting to those councils what they are able to provide.
"If what happened in Victoria had happened here they wouldn't be able to issue any emergency advice.
And those people wouldn't have been able to grab their radios, but they did all have cellphones."
He had not started legal proceedings over the company using his invention without his consent because when he approached them they said they had not sent any emergency warning texts.
He was also not in a financial situation to take legal action.
Mr Roper understood it was not the concern of the police that he held the patent for the system, but the concern of the companies who submitted proposals to them.
"That's correct. But if they were serious about saving public money, and there was one company I would choose to license my business with, it would be the Government because then you broaden the field of businesses . . . you can choose from to supply the system."
His interest in the system was in its benefits to the public, not in the commercial side of it, he said.
A police spokeswoman said New Zealand Police had no comment.
At this stage, police were simply carrying out a feasibility exercise as part of wider work and there was no intention yet to implement a system.
