How Invisible Errors in Machine Translations Can Undermine Legal Certainty

Joana Figueiras. IP Prosecution Specialist

Translation in the field of intellectual property requires more than linguistic competence: it demands terminological precision, technical knowledge, and legal sensitivity. Translations of patents, trademark goods/services, and legal documents within the scope of intellectual property are texts that cannot tolerate ambiguity—any error may compromise rights, lead to litigation, or invalidate the applicant’s protection. With the advancement of machine translation tools, many professionals face the dilemma between efficiency and reliability. For IP-specialized translators, this scenario raises crucial questions: how safe is it to rely on machine translation? Can these tools distinguish between technical and common meanings? What are the legal and technical consequences of terminological errors in IP translations? This article explores the boundaries of machine translation in the context of intellectual property, highlighting the importance of human translators in preserving legal certainty and ensuring effective rights protection.

Efficiency vs. Accuracy: The Machine Translation Dilemma

Machine translation offers speed and cost reduction, representing an opportunity for companies to become more competitive in the market. However, in the context of intellectual property—where terminological and legal precision is essential—the benefits of machine translation can quickly be outweighed by errors that compromise patent or trademark protection. Efficiency is only advantageous when accompanied by qualified human review, capable of ensuring the technical and legal consistency of documents.

Legal and Technical Risks

a) Terminology Errors

Machine translations may fail to interpret specific technical or legal terms. In the case of patents, for example, an inadequate translation of a claim can alter the scope of protection granted, leading to rejection of the application or exposing the applicant to risks in potential litigation.

b) Terminological Inconsistency

One of the main risks associated with using machine translation in intellectual property documents lies in terminological inconsistency. Precision in translating terms and expressions is fundamental, requiring a literal and rigorous approach that excludes linguistic variations likely to compromise the clarity and legal validity of the translated content.

c) Lack of Legal Context

Machine translation often relies on decontextualized language models, disregarding the legal framework of the target country. In the field of intellectual property, this limitation can compromise the validity of contractual clauses and provisions regarding ownership of rights. The absence of adaptation to the applicable legal system may generate ambiguities, conflicts between parties, and hinder the recognition of rights across jurisdictions.

d) Privacy and Security

The use of free platforms for machine translation raises serious concerns regarding data protection. These tools do not always guarantee adequate security levels, potentially resulting in unauthorized disclosure of sensitive content. This risk is particularly critical in pre-filing stages of intellectual property rights, such as patents, where any undue exposure may compromise novelty and, consequently, the validity of the application.

For example, using a free platform to translate the technical description of an invention before filing a patent may result in the content being stored or shared without the user’s knowledge, making it publicly accessible.

Best Practices to Mitigate Risks

• MTPE (Machine Translation Post-Editing): Combines the speed of machine translation with specialized human review.
• Use of Secure Platforms: Machine translation tools with confidentiality guarantees and technical support (e.g., ModernMT).
• Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT): CAT tools allow the creation and use of specialized glossaries and translation memories, ensuring terminological consistency in technical and legal documents. They also include quality control features that help detect inconsistencies and errors. Another crucial aspect is the secure environment these platforms offer, ensuring the confidentiality of translated content. Among the most widely used software is SDL Trados.
• TMclass: For the translation of goods and services, the European Union provides, through EUIPO’s TMclass tool, a database that allows consultation of the correct translation of terms used in trademark classification. This tool contributes to terminological uniformity and facilitates alignment with the legal requirements of different EU countries.

Conclusion

Machine translation is a useful tool, but it does not replace the discerning eye of intellectual property specialists. Effective IP protection requires linguistic precision, legal sensitivity, and contextual awareness. In international environments, where errors can have irreversible consequences, an approach that combines technology with human expertise is the safest path. For IP translators, this means taking on a strategic role in mediating between language, technology, and law—ensuring that translation is not only accurate but legally effective.