Despite rolling a homegrown translation app with iOS 14, Apple resorts to freebie tool for Dutch Ts-and-Cs waffle Apple is apparently so skint that it has had to resort to freebie versions of machine-based translation services for its Dutch legalese. Spotted by a Register reader browsing the small print behind the company's services, the text "Vertaald met www.DeepL.com/Translator (gratis versie)" can be found lurking just above the " …
With a legal document, it is not just a case of making an accurate translation. You also need to make sure that it is compliant with the laws and legal drafting practices of the country in question.
For example, to translate from American English to British English, you don't just correct a few spelling errors. There's lots of legal phrases with specific meanings that will need to be completely overhauled. Also, things like "Federal Court" may be perfectly valid English on both sides of the pond, but completely meaningless from a legal point of view on the Eastern side of it.
If you ask Google to translate the following from Italian:
Slovenia
Croazia
Serbia
Bosnia
Montenegro
Macedonia
you get:
Slovenia
Croatia
Serbia
Bosnia
Montenegro
fruit salad
Deepl does at least get this right.
Fruit Salad would be a correct translation of Macedonia if it was found in a menu with a list of other food items, but not in a list of countries that were formerly part of Yugoslavia.
But then, if I ask Deepl to translate
Gelato
Macedonia
It gets that Gelato is Ice Cream, but it doesn't get that Macedonia is actually fruit salad in this context.
Yep, I thought it was a bit of a strange thing to simply translate too.
Mind I don't know what is current and standard practice for these things but you do assume (perhaps wrongly) that an outfit the size of Apple would be covered in most jurisdictions as to not need a free version of a translation tool.
Depends a bit on the relevant jurisdiction. US T&Cs generally rely heavily on extra-terroriality but contain the relevant clauses that cover their butt in case courts in other jurisdictions disagee. E.g. Microsoft's EULA has frequently been considered unfit by German and other courts regarding automatic consent and the right to copy but this hasn't invalidated the agreements in their entirity.
Apple got caught out in Germany as well. They put the EULA for OS X inside the box and the EULA said, (among other things) you can't use it on a non-Apple device. But German law says that only those conditions that are present at the point of sale (and the EULA is in a sealed package, so can't be read before the sale) are enforceable.
That left the clause as unenforceable and it was legal to install OS X on non-Apple kit. That is now moot, given that it is all online these days.
Hard to believe any Apple employee with even the slightest understanding of the law would thought using a translation service would work for a legal document. I rather doubt Apple does all such translation itself, it probably hires someone (hopefully law firms) to do it. But a law firm wouldn't think this was appropriate either.
Whoever did it, maybe someone had lied on their resume about being fluent in Dutch and was forced to fake it. They'd know no one would be likely to check it too carefully, and obviously didn't. Apparently whoever took the shortcut didn't either, or they would have removed that link.
Dutch people should carefully read what is likely to be goobledegook, because they might find poor translation has committed Apple to all kinds of largess!
Having had to translate many legal documents from English to German and vice-versa, yes, getting a lawyer to read it afterwards is essential, otherwise the whole exercise is pointless.
And even a cursory reading of the text by the proof reader should have thrown out the DeepL link from the text...
In my experience, translations are normally farmed out to specialists. As others have said, the same is true of legal text.
The most plausible explanation here is that the freebie version is a placeholder that should have been removed when the definitive version became available.
At least their lawyers are smart enough not to use Apple software. Based on my experience with my iPhone, I would see this as an "A" grade on their CV. Unfortunately, the fact that they used any translation software, rather than a Dutch lawyer, gives them an overall FAIL.
I can (barely) understand Apple saving pennies by using a cheap capacitor or other component, although it is sh*tty thing to do. After all, when they sell hundreds of millions of phones, those pennies add up, and early failure, after warranty period, just adds to future sales. But this is a one time expense with no future advantages, and potentially serious disadvantages. Apple are just cheap bastards.
Microsoft tried to save money with Vista and did the German translation in their US offices, instead of getting it done locally, in Germany.
They got lambasted when Vista was released in Germany. There were a lot of real howlers in the translation. The best being in the Network Neighbourhood properties translation, which was essentially the German for "Change your neighbours attitude". Unfortunately, it didn't work as advertised...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
