The AIr™ Patent
AIr™ is built upon an internationally granted method patent (EP3077882B1 & counterparts) that protects the core process of transforming drones into autonomous cleaning tools using airflow. The patent secures the intellectual property for using sensor-based alignment to clean surfaces without physical contact, water, or chemicals.
Intellectual Property
The foundational claim of the patent reads:
“Method for controlling a flying body for cleaning surfaces, comprising a sensor system for the detection of geometrical characteristics of an object and the alignment of a flying body according to said object in order to clean it using the airflow of said flying body.”
This claim defines a process where drones equipped with sensors detect and align themselves with surfaces to clean them with their own airflow. The method enables precision cleaning while avoiding physical contact.
First to File
When this patent was filed, with a priority date of 5 July 2014, the underlying technology had not been adapted for this method. The relevance of this technical field was subsequently underscored when a prominent inventor group, including Microsoft’s former CTO and the physicist behind the Strategic Defense Initiative’s Brilliant Pebbles concept, filed related UAV airflow cleaning applications.
These applications, including US applications granted as US9468951B2 and US9993852B2 and European application EP3183170, had a later priority date of 20 August 2014. Although the EPO issued an intention to grant for the European application, it was then deemed withdrawn. The US patents later lapsed, while the earlier-filed AIr™ method patent remains granted.
Commercial Scope
The drone airflow cleaning patent protects the method of non-contact surface cleaning by UAVs using sensor-guided airflow alignment, with the separate Ionised AIr™ application family extending into fine particulate adhesion modification.
Licensing this patented method enables businesses to leverage existing drones equipped with standard sensors to enter new markets, respond effectively to tenders requiring innovative cleaning solutions, and gain advantages in sustainability-driven industries.
Global Protection
The AIr™ method is granted and active across major global markets.
Australia: AU2015285989B2
Canada: CA2991533C
China: CN106537274B
Europe: EP3077882B1
Hong Kong: HK1237899
India: IN499859
Saudi Arabia: SA11961
United States: US10046857B2
IP Licensing
AIr™ licensing spans hardware OEMs, software developers and enterprise facility managers. Agreements are structured by field of use, territory, duration and exclusivity.
Licensing FAQ
Disclaimer: This section addresses common commercial questions and legal scenarios regarding the AIr™ patent portfolio. It is informational only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific enquiries regarding potential infringement or licensing, please consult a qualified patent attorney.
What activities constitute patent infringement?
Patent infringement occurs when an unauthorised party performs a method containing all essential elements of at least one granted claim within a protected jurisdiction; offering the method for use may also infringe under the relevant national law. Infringement can be direct (performing the method yourself) or indirect, for example by inducing others to perform it, or by supplying components specifically intended for use in practising the method (contributory infringement), where the applicable legal requirements are met.
Does knowledge of a patent affect remedies?
In the United States, courts may increase damages up to three times for willful infringement, which can involve knowingly using patented technology commercially without authorisation. Outside the US, remedies may differ and should be assessed under local law.
Can the patent be circumvented?
To legally circumvent this patent, an alternative method must avoid at least one essential element of the core claim and any equivalent of it. One example would be a method that does not use drone-generated airflow as the cleaning mechanism. Practically speaking, circumventing this patent could require adopting less efficient or fundamentally different operational approaches, as the combination of sensor-based alignment and airflow cleaning is precisely what defines the method’s commercial advantage.
If a drone is flown manually, does that bypass the patent?
Manual control alone does not guarantee circumvention. Drones may use built-in flight controller subroutines, such as altitude hold or optical flow stabilisation, that align the drone relative to surfaces using sensor data. Where such subroutines derive and act on the object’s geometric characteristics while the drone’s airflow is used for commercial cleaning, the essential elements of the patented method may still be practised.
How do flight controller subroutines factor into infringement?
Modern flight controllers include subroutines that continuously align drones toward surfaces using sensor data fused with altitude control and stabilisation features. If these subroutines align drones based on detected surface geometry before or during commercial use of the airflow for cleaning, they may practise the essential elements described in the granted claims and could warrant a licence in jurisdictions where the patent is in force.
What are indirect and contributory infringement, and how do they apply?
Providing tools, software, flight plans or instructions may give rise to indirect infringement, even where the provider does not operate the drones, if the applicable requirements concerning knowledge, intent or supply of means are met. For example, supplying a software kernel, automated flight plan, or sensor configuration designed to enable autonomous airflow cleaning may constitute contributory infringement. Without a licence, cross-border collaboration involving such components must be carefully managed to avoid legal exposure.
Does adding a nozzle bypass the patent?
Adding a nozzle does not, by itself, establish that an operation falls outside the patent. If the drone’s rotor airflow contributes to surface cleaning and the operation uses the claimed sensor-based detection and alignment, the addition of an air or water nozzle does not necessarily remove those features. A nozzle that channels rotor-generated airflow is also not automatically outside the claimed method. Where a separately supplied nozzle is intended to perform the cleaning independently of rotor downwash, the operating arrangement would need to prevent that downwash from contributing to cleaning to support that particular distinction.
Does extraterritorial infringement apply to method patents?
Generally, a method must be performed within a protected jurisdiction to constitute direct infringement. However, indirect or contributory infringement can occur if components such as software or hardware enabling sensor-based alignment are manufactured or developed abroad but are specifically intended for commercial deployment within protected jurisdictions. Once imported or utilised commercially in a protected jurisdiction, they may trigger indirect infringement liability.
How does this patent apply to water-spraying drones?
If drone-generated airflow actively contributes to surface cleaning or debris removal, including alongside or after water application, and the drone is aligned relative to the surface using the claimed sensor-based control method, the operation may fall within the scope of protection, subject to a claim-by-claim assessment. Purely water-based spraying performed at altitudes where rotor wash does not interact with the surface generally falls outside the claimed method.
What if someone claims they are inspecting surfaces rather than cleaning them?
Inspection typically differs from cleaning in altitude, sensor usage precision, airflow intensity, and operational frequency. However, if an inspection protocol involves close sensor-guided alignment combined with airflow exposure sufficient to remove or displace debris, even unintentionally, this may constitute infringement in jurisdictions where the patent is in force. Genuine inspections conducted at altitudes where rotor wash does not materially interact with surface debris generally do not infringe.
Can the technology be used for research without a licence?
Commercial use, including corporate R&D or research aimed at future commercialisation, often requires explicit licensing permission from the patent holder. Certain jurisdictions permit limited exceptions for academic research and experimental use. Grant applicants, tenderers, and competition entrants are commonly required to address freedom to operate and to account for any third-party licences necessary to perform, deliver, or commercialise their proposed work.
Is using drone airflow for cleaning too obvious to have been patented?
The patent protects the specific combination of sensor-based alignment and cleaning using the flying body’s own airflow, not airflow alone. The EPO granted the patent following examination against its requirements for novelty and inventive step.