Almost every day, we are told by a company or law firm that another translation service offers much lower fees. Our response: if a translation service can offer far lower rates than its competitors, it is worth inquiring why. For example, for patent translations, Morningside relies on in-country patent attorneys to proofread translated applications. This increases the cost of the translation, but it is a critical quality assurance step. Many of our competitors do not. Our translators are widely recognized as some of the best names in the industry. Some of our larger competitors do not have the luxury of being as selective. If a translation service offers lower rates by skimping on proofreading or relying on sub-par translators, then the money saved could easily be canceled out by costs related to revising or even re-doing the translation.

In short, as you consider options for reducing translation costs, it makes sense to carefully review the workflow and processes of different translation services. Just as no two translations are exactly alike, no two translation services offer the same quality.

All of our translators are carefully vetted and required to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA). They do not receive personal information about our clients unless that information is needed to perform the translation. In cases where materials are classified or more stringent security measures are necessary, we act accordingly. For example, when a major media company needed to translate over 30 hours of highly confidential video footage, we assembled a group of translators to perform the work on-site. They were selected following stringent background checks, and our project team managed the group on a daily basis and monitored their work ensuring that strict security procedures were followed.

If you are concerned about the quality of the translations provided by your foreign associates or translation provider, one way to check for accuracy is to ask a company like Morningside to perform a back translation. What is a back translation? It’s the process of translating a document that has already been translated into a foreign language back into the original language. The two documents are then compared and reviewed for accuracy. To manage costs, you can have a back translation performed only on the claims. It makes sense to have back translations performed on several claim sets to get a broad picture of the translation quality your current vendor is providing. Questions about back translations? Call Morningside and we will be glad to help.

The obvious solution is an EU patent that would be legally binding in all EU member states, and require minimal or no translation. That has long been a dream of European officials, but disagreements about language and other issues have prevented the EU patent from coming into being.

Now the European Commission is proposing a compromise that would allow European patents to be submitted to the EPO in just one of the office’s official languages – French, German, or English. The claims would still have to be translated into the other two languages, which is line with the current reality. In case of litigation, the patent holder would have to provide a full translation into the language where the infringement process is taking place. Most patent applications in Europe are already filed in English, and French and German are the next most common languages, so the time and cost of translating patents for Europe would be drastically reduced.

Unfortunately it doesn’t look like this regulation is going to pass anytime soon. Spain and Italy are strongly opposed to having their languages dropped, and several other European countries are also against it. EU officials predict heated discussions in the coming months as they seek a compromise solution that all 27 EU members are willing to sign up for. Morningside will continue monitoring the situation and update our readers on developments.

As one of the most important legal technology events of the year, the conference was a huge success in introducing Morningside’s legal translation services, interpreting services, transcription and multimedia services to the legal community at large.  We were able to showcase our top service and quality as a translation company specializing in legal translations and patent translations.  Many attendees who were fortunate enough to swing by Morningside’s booth were surprised to see the piles and piles of candy and free giveaways that were offered.  One lucky winner was even awarded an iPod Touch at the end of the three-day conference.

Morningside is a global leader in the legal and technical translations industry, and as we are expanding our scope of legal translations services and technical translation solutions, we were proud to have attended LegalTech and look forward to making it a permanent installation on our calendar in coming years.  If you missed us this year, come see us next year at LegalTech 2011!

To learn more about Morningside’s legal translations, patent translations, interpretations, and multimedia services, please visit us at www.morningtrans.com.

In December, EU ministers made a big breakthrough in negotiations concerning the EU patent, agreeing to set up a single patent court for the EU. But the plan still has a long way to go, and for now, 27 EU governments are awaiting a legal opinion from the European Court of Justice and the input of the European Parliament before moving ahead.

What does this mean for patent translations? Since the London Agreement went into force in May 2008, most EU countries do not require translating a full patent into one of their official languages if the patent was drafted in one of the official languages of the EPO (i.e., English, French, or German). Several contracting states still require that the claims be translated into their official language, but do not require a translation of the description. The London Agreement has certainly reduced the translation costs involved in filing patents in Europe, which, according to the EPO, can account for over 40 percent of the overall filing costs. (For biotech and chemical patents, the translation costs can be significantly higher.) But the London Agreement—while it reduced the need for patent translation—did not solve the problem of high translation costs in Europe. Many EU states still have not signed the London Agreement, and as anyone who has filed a long patent application broadly across Europe knows, the translation costs can still be exorbitant, easily exceeding $100,000 when filing with expensive foreign associates. The EPO’s goal of a “post-grant language regime” where only claims have to be translated into national languages and the description can remain in English only still seems quite far away, and getting patent protection in the EU still costs 11 times as much as it does in the United States.

Obviously, an EU patent would supplant the London Agreement and could eliminate the need for any translations if the original application is written in English. Morningside will continue to closely monitor developments at the EPO and the EU as far as translations are concerned, in our continued efforts to reduce translation costs for our clients.