Saturday, 31 January 2009
Dyson again: prior art lost in translation
The Dyson decision (noted by PatLit here) is particularly interesting from the viewpoint of an ex-patent translation proofreader, writes Luke Ueda-Sarson, who says:
Mike O'Keeffe said...
The frequency of errors in translation is something I have looked into, statistically, and found, for example, that in WIPO abstracts of PCTs filed in Japanese, 10% of the 'English' abstracts contained material errors and 48% contained 'poor expression'. Now abstracts are not claims, but if after translation by freelance translators, checking by agencies and editing by staff translators at WIPO this level of errors still occurred, what chance has a law firm who outsourced translation to the cheapest bidder (and worst translator) ?
話変わって、映画「Lost in translation」に、「rip me」と言うつもりで「Lip me」と言っている風俗おばさんが描かれていたっけ・・・（逆だったかな？）