There ain't no such thing as original sin at SDL!

Exhibit #1 memoQ graphic

Exhibit #2 memoQ graphic

Sometime last year, memoQ Translation Technologies Ltd., the software artists formerly known as Kilgray, aka mQtech, released their "Trend Report 2019" including the graphics above and more. I have studiously avoided blogging about the trend report up to now, because enthusiasm comes hard for a document that was clearly prepared by an industry outsider (consultant) with little understanding of issues faced in the translation sector, so that some of the "questions" proposed and discussed are really quite irrelevant to the present and future state of translation.

But Kilgray... oops, mQtech is the de facto technology leader for advanced desktop and client/server translation environment management, usually introducing the truly innovative tools for improving translation processes and quality so that others like SDL can copy them at some later date. This, of course, doesn't account for everything, for example the underappreciated bilingual review tables of Déjà Vu, which probably resulted in one of the biggest boosts for memoQ when that feature was adopted in version 4.2 before it was copied by so many others later, including the flawed Fluency, SDL Trados et alia. The "monolingual review" feature of memoQ, which allows edited translations in certain formats or portions thereof (to avoid mangling formats of parts which have not changed) to be re-imported to facilitate TM updates, is one example of memoQ leading the way for SDL (who implemented that feature about two years later) and others, as is the long history of optimization for speech recognition with Dragon NaturallySpeaking (with editing controls unavailable when that tool is used with most other CAT tools), which lately has gone farther in the somewhat bleeding edge but interesting implementation of speech recognition in Hey memoQ.

There is a long history of SDL looking to its main competitor to find its way in the darkness of translation sector tools competition. But one rather obnoxious advert that keeps cropping up in social media feeds makes it clear that the leadership of mQtech extends beyond mere technology for SDL:

These days, translation memories are better forgotten!

It seems that in the horrors of preparation for Brexit, UK-based SDL is unable to find original service providers internally, domestically or internationally to produce the artwork needed to market their questionable technology and concepts. What we have above is the same thing in terms of style and construction as we see with mQtech, but in green.

This gives me no little worry, really, because the underlying symbolism is deeply disturbing. Range and Green... Brexit... I fear that the situation between the two leading tool providers for translation technology is degenerating into a situation like we find at the Irish border:

It's an ugly situation. With Cromwellian arrogance, SDL has appropriated the colors of the political underdog, ravaging not only the translating Irish countryside with its confusing pathwork of features, but exporting the conflict internationally as dark powers so often do. And mQtech, unfortunately, bears Unionist colors into the battle at the wordface, though the symbolic interpretation of that is anyone's guess. We can only pray that some compromise, some peace accord can be achieved before the looming Brexit deadline, when things at the border and at translation conferences around the world may escalate into the Unthinkable.

A wise man once said, "SDL should copy memoQ's features or its artwork, but not both", but I would argue that in the current political climate, doing the latter is a bad idea in any case!

Carry a big stick!

I work with a lot of agencies alongside my direct clientele. How many? It's hard to say. Some are "frequent flyers", others would like to be and others show up once a year or less frequently with some oddball job that only a freaky specialist with a knowledge of contract law and gene technology can handle. Somewhere upwards of 50, possibly more than 100. Over the years definitely far more than 100. With all those relationships over the course of a decade I have experienced very few payment problems. Once in a while there are delays, lost invoices or other issues, but I am careful in choosing my cooperation partners, and it is rare that I deal with deadbeats like some have the misfortune to encounter.

I haven't been entirely spared by fraudsters. Years ago when I first started translating, I was given an interesting historical text on German rearmament to translate, and the "agent" disappeared into the dust. Several other victims had taken projects from this person through ProZ postings, but although we shared information, none of us were able to do better than to trace the crime to a particular area of the UK. However, I try to make something good of whatever I'm left with in any situation, and the text I translated has been a useful part of my example portfolio over the years. Directly or indirectly it has helped me to land other interesting (paid) projects.

How was I able to do this? Very simple. I own the copyright to that translation! Under the contract law of most civilized jurisdictions, a translator will retain the copyright to any work for which he or she has not received the full contractual consideration.

This is useful to consider in cases where a client has not paid a translator. If my direct customer or my agency has not paid me, I retain the copyright to my work. If that work is published in print or on the Internet, this can have serious consequences for the individual or company publishing the information. I mentioned this to one worried translator who contacted me privately with her collection concerns after reading about the payment practices and other issues with a notorious Swiss fraudster (slither, slither); in her case the end customer was the EU, and the suggestion that she would report the nonpayment resulted in a quick transfer of funds despite insolvency proceedings against the company. Others have used similar tactics with success.

Do check your local laws in such matters, but in general copyright can be though of as a big stick that can crack some pretty hard nuts. And even where there is no payment issue, the formula no consideration = no contract can be useful in dealing with those pesky unpaid "test translations". These too may be fodder for the sample portfolio.

I am personally relaxed in dealing with intellectual property issues when it's a matter of my property. In the late 80s I gave a patentable process for a new medical device material to a friend to help him out; the process was worth millions, resulted in IOL implants in some millions of people around the world and made a number of people rich. And all I got was a lousy t-shirt. Well, a bit more actually, but I'm still working for a living and cleaning my own toilet without regrets. So I don't get too picky about TM copyright issues or worry about these things for the most part. Unless some fraudster is trying to take advantage of me. Then I grab that copyright with both hands, raise it high and...

BAM!!!