Patenting Tendencies and Some Specific Features of Translating Patents in Microelectronics

Abstract

Patent protection of inventions is an essential component of any high-tech industry. Microelectronics is one of the most rapidly developing industries with a very short lifecycle of its products. In addition to legal information defining the rights of the patent holder, a patent contains full technical information describing the invention essence. Translation of a patent involves certain difficulties both because of the information presentation style specific to this kind of document and the responsibility placed on the translator in connection with the possibility of incorrectly interpreting the invention idea, as a result of which the developer may become misinformed. The article discusses the main translation difficulties stemming from ambiguity of words and frequent use of general scientific words by the researchers to expand their own rights. Special attention is paid to the interconnection between scientific-technical and patent terminologies. It is noted that referring to patent search systems using the IPC is the most effective and prompt way to search for the most accurate interpretation of terms and expressions in making translation. To determine the specific features of translation, a detailed patent structure is given, each paragraph in which is characterized by its own lexical and grammatical features. A claim is considered in detail, because it is exactly this part of the patent that determines the scope of exclusive rights. The main legal meaning of a patent relates to the claim and is a combination of essential features, each of which is necessary and sufficient for a technical result, the achievement of which the patented invention is directed to. The availability of both the European (German) and the American claim construction models is noted. They differ from each other cardinally both in syntax and in presentation logic. Translation difficulties are analyzed. A conclusion is drawn that in translating all sources representing the essence of the patented solution, it is necessary to keep the unity of the terminology to avoid, in the final result, any ambiguity in interpreting the already known solutions and the new technical solution that is subject to patenting. Free interpretation of the invention description context is unacceptable.