So it's Dan's own unique system/approach. It's a Dan Harden method?
I wouldn't call it a system. We might call it "stuff". I've heard Dan call it "this stuff", but never "his stuff". When I train with my training buddies we might call it "Dan's stuff", but Dan makes it very clear that he didn't invent it. It was taught to him. And he is teaching us.
I don't think Dan is the only one really
teaching "this stuff". Other teachers, like Akuzawa Minoru and Mike Sigman, are also explicitly teaching "this stuff". I have no direct experience with Akuzawa Minoru or Mike Sigman, only with some of their students. From what I've heard there are differences in teaching methods. But even though the end result might differ to some degree, I think it's essentially about the same "stuff".
So I think Dan has teaching methods that are specific to him (but I guess that can be said about any teacher)), but "this stuff" is not his invention or discovery. I mean, if I'm a physics teacher with great didactical qualities, would you say I'm teaching Dave's system rather than physics?