CSA Research is an independent research firm specialising in the translation, localisation, and language services industry. Each year, it publishes the Global Market Study, which analyses hundreds of companies worldwide and verifies the revenue they generate from language services and global content solutions. To be included in the list, companies must submit their financial data to a verification process conducted by CSA Research itself.

What Is the CSA Research Verified 100?

Now in its 22nd edition, CSA Research’s study is considered one of the longest-running and most authoritative benchmarks in the industry. Starting with the 2026 edition, the list has been renamed Verified 100 and its methodology has been refined: companies are no longer ranked according to their total corporate revenue, but on verified revenue generated specifically from language services and global content solutions.

This change provides a more consistent and comparable picture of the market, reflecting the fact that many companies in the industry now operate across a broader range of business areas. For clients, investors, and industry professionals, the Verified 100 therefore provides an objective benchmark for assessing developments in the language services and global content market.

A Recognition That Also Confirms Our Progress

For Aglatech14, being confirmed among CSA Research’s Top 100 is a source of great satisfaction. It is not an achievement that can be taken for granted: each edition requires companies to resubmit their annual results for verification, in a market that is evolving rapidly, not least as a result of new technologies.

Aglatech14 is positioned as an agency specialising in translation for regulated industries, particularly the technical-industrial and medical-scientific sectors, and is one of the leading providers of intellectual property translation services in Italy. For this reason, the Verified 100 represents a valuable annual opportunity to measure our performance against an external and independent benchmark.

Thank You to Everyone Who Made This Achievement Possible

An achievement like this is the result of the daily work of many different people, united by a passion for what they do and a strong sense of professionalism and responsibility. We would therefore like to thank our entire team for the dedication they bring to every project, as well as our external collaborators, including translators, interpreters, and other language professionals, who work alongside us and make a tangible contribution to the quality of our services.

Finally, a special thank you goes to our clients, who continue to entrust us with their translation projects year after year. It is thanks to their continued trust that we are able to keep growing.

Source: CSA Research Verified 100™ (2026)

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo Aglatech14 Again Among CSA Research’s Top 100 proviene da Aglatech14.

Two Opposite Approaches, One Common Risk

The localization industry has gradually split into two opposing approaches. On one side are brands that trust the polished appearance of AI-generated translations. If the text sounds natural, they assume it is accurate and publish it without carefully checking it against the source. On the other side are organizations that have become extremely cautious. They believe every AI-generated translation must be reviewed word by word, resulting in lengthy and expensive review processes. Both approaches ultimately create the same problem. They lead to inefficient language quality management.

The first approach exposes brands to subtle but potentially serious errors. The second slows down workflows without necessarily improving quality because an unstructured manual review can still miss the nuanced meaning shifts introduced by machine translation.

Industry data confirms that this risk is far from theoretical. According to Crowdin’s survey, reported by Slator, AI has accelerated localization workflows, but 20.4% of companies reported an increase in quality incidents or regressions after introducing AI-powered translation. These findings show that quality management is one of the most significant challenges in adopting AI translation, rather than a minor operational issue.

Where Invisible Errors Hide

Not long ago, identifying a poor translation was relatively easy. Awkward sentences, grammatical mistakes, or incorrect terminology immediately revealed problems. Today, the situation is very different. Modern language models generate fluent, natural-sounding content that can easily convince even experienced readers. Unfortunately, fluency does not guarantee accuracy. A translation may read perfectly while communicating something different from the original message.

Language models also tend to resolve ambiguities by making assumptions. They may infer unspecified grammatical gender, translate idiomatic expressions literally, or fail to adapt cultural references appropriately for the target audience. The problem becomes even more significant when contextual information is missing. Technical terminology, operating instructions, and specialized documentation can all be translated inaccurately if the AI system lacks sufficient knowledge of the subject matter.

This concern is not simply anecdotal. Industry analysts increasingly describe it as a genuine “translation at scale” risk. AI-generated content can contain subtle inaccuracies or genuine semantic errors, while the sheer volume of material produced makes comprehensive human review increasingly difficult. This matters far beyond the localization industry. According to the Nimdzi 100 2026 report, the global language services market was valued at approximately $72.6 billion in 2025 and is projected to reach $76.1 billion by 2030 under the baseline forecast. Despite the rapid growth of artificial intelligence, language services remain a highly valuable global industry. In sectors such as healthcare, legal services, finance, and life sciences, even a minor terminology error can completely change the meaning of a sentence.

Not All Languages Perform Equally Well with AI

Languages with fewer digital resources are particularly vulnerable to these issues. AI models are trained on enormous datasets, but the amount of available training data varies considerably between languages. As a result, machine translation quality tends to decline for less common language pairs, increasing the likelihood that important nuances will be lost.

Europe offers a particularly relevant example. The European Union’s Single Market connects approximately 450 million consumers across 24 official languages. In this environment, an inaccurate translation can result in lost business opportunities or even regulatory compliance issues. For this reason, legislation is also evolving. The EU AI Act reflects what many localization professionals have argued for years. Human review of AI-generated content is no longer optional in high-risk contexts. It is becoming a compliance requirement. The same principle applies to patent translation and intellectual property, as discussed in our analysis of AI trends in intellectual property.

Managing Quality Through a Risk-Based Strategy

The most effective way to manage translation quality is to adopt a risk-based approach. Each piece of content should be assigned a risk level, with the level of human oversight increasing accordingly. Low-risk content, such as internal communications, may only require a light human review after AI translation. High-risk content, including legal, medical, patent, and regulatory documents, should continue to be translated by professional translators supported by specialized quality assurance tools.

This structured approach allows organizations to benefit from AI’s speed where mistakes have limited consequences while concentrating human expertise where meaning errors could have significant business or legal implications.

Building a Reliable Localization Process

The most effective way to take advantage of AI without compromising quality is to establish a clear process in which every stage has a specific purpose. This is exactly how we work. We combine the speed of artificial intelligence with the specialized expertise of our linguistic team. In some projects, AI performs the most time-consuming tasks, including first drafts, terminology research, and preliminary versions. Human expertise, however, always determines the final result.

We rely on both in-house and external specialist reviewers, together with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) across every industry sector. The most important stage remains qualified human review. Its purpose is to ensure that the translated content faithfully reflects the intent of the original text. This involves much more than correcting obvious mistakes. It means asking more subtle questions. Does the content convey the intended emotion in the target market? Does the message remain consistent with the brief and the brand’s identity? Has medical and scientific terminology been translated with the level of precision required by the industry, avoiding ambiguities that could compromise safety or regulatory compliance? Are technical instructions and safety information clear, complete, and free from interpretations that could mislead the end user?

The Value of Human Linguistic Oversight

Today, true expertise is no longer defined simply by producing fluent text. It lies in knowing where and how to intervene to preserve the original meaning. This is where experienced localization professionals make the difference. They combine the speed of AI-powered tools with rigorous quality assurance processes tailored to each industry, each market, and each communication objective.

Working with an experienced language partner allows organizations to benefit from the efficiency of artificial intelligence without sacrificing accuracy, cultural relevance, or brand protection. In a market where every translation appears polished, the real difference lies in asking one essential question: does this translation truly communicate what the company intended to say?

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo AI Translation: The Illusion of Perfection That Hides Meaning Errors proviene da Aglatech14.

We want to tell the story of this milestone through the authentic voices of the people who made it possible. That is why we begin with the meaning of the certification and the journey behind it, before talking about scores and procedures.

What is the PdR 125 Certification?

PdR 125 is the Italian reference practice that measures a company’s commitment to gender equality. It evaluates both policies and measurable outcomes, including pay equity, career opportunities, work-life balance, and parental support.

Achieving this certification means turning principles that are often taken for granted into concrete, measurable objectives, verified by an independent certification body.

At Aglatech14, 90% of our team is made up of women, and our leadership team is entirely female. While this might suggest that gender equality is already part of our DNA, numbers alone are not enough to earn the certification, let alone achieve the highest possible score. What matters is having structured policies, transparent processes, and a genuine commitment across every aspect of the employee experience, from recruitment to professional development.

In practice, this means reviewing tangible processes. How career paths are defined, how job opportunities are communicated, and how employees are supported when returning from maternity or paternity leave. These are often implicit practices, but the certification requires them to be clearly documented, transparent, and verifiable for everyone.

Two Days of Audit

The certification process took place over two audit days. The first day focused on collecting and reviewing all the required documentation. The second was dedicated to interviews with selected members of our team, followed by a more detailed review of specific aspects related to the submitted documentation.

During the audit, we presented our all-female leadership structure, our employee welfare initiatives, and our approach to human resource management across different areas. What emerged was a consistent and coherent way of managing people, regardless of their role or employment contract.

The Starting Point: Listening to Our Team

Long before drafting procedures or defining performance indicators, we asked ourselves where to begin. The most honest answer was to start with the people who experience our company every day. That is why we chose to build this journey together with our team.

Our starting point was a simple question. How do the people at Aglatech14 experience these topics? We launched an internal survey to better understand our employees’ perceptions, experiences, and expectations regarding gender equality and inclusion.

The responses gave us an honest and valuable picture. They revealed deeply rooted stereotypes, but also a strong willingness to discuss them openly. From there came the idea of giving our people a direct voice through a more personal format, a series of video interviews.

The Interviews

Four video interviews were created as a result of this listening process and are available here. In them, members of our team speak openly and honestly. They share the stereotypes they have recognized in themselves, sometimes without even realizing it, as well as experiences related not only to gender but also to other forms of diversity.

Each person speaks in their own voice, from their own perspective, and through their own story. The fourth and final episode brings the journey full circle. It reflects on everything we have learned so far and looks ahead to the steps we hope to take over the coming months as we continue building an increasingly fair and inclusive workplace.

Employee Welfare Beyond the Numbers

One of the aspects that most interested the external auditors was our employee welfare program. This includes initiatives such as an extra day off for employees’ birthdays, paid volunteering hours introduced this year, and a high degree of flexibility regarding both working hours and workplace location.

These details allowed us to communicate what truly matters to us. The people who work at Aglatech14 are not simply skilled professionals. They are individuals with personal lives, families, hobbies, and interests.

These are values that deserve time and space, and for us they are just as important as professional performance.

A Journey That Continues

For us, this certification is not the result of a one-time achievement. It is the confirmation of a journey that began two years ago and has been built step by step.

Internal policies must be maintained and continuously updated, while results need to be monitored over time. This is work that extends well beyond the audit itself.

Our next challenge is already on the horizon, 2027. We are committed to maintaining the standards we have achieved with the same approach that guided us from the beginning, by continuing to listen to the people who work with us every day.

The Aglatech14 Team

L'articolo Aglatech14 and the PdR 125 Certification: A Journey Built on Listening proviene da Aglatech14.

This year, the competition reached record-breaking numbers, with 1,300 applications from 126 countries. From these, the jury selected 33 finalists across six categories: Agriculture and Food, Creative Industries, Environment, Health, ICT and, making its debut this year, Sports.

The winners were announced on 10 July in Geneva, during the WIPO Assemblies, before delegates from 194 countries. Eleven companies received awards in total, one in each category, with two winners in Sports. The winners were AgZen, Infira, Botree, FLOSFIA, ArteryFlow, Regend Therapeutics, Jade ND, DABIDA, ICTK, Drovid and Bearmind.

What the WIPO Global Award Really Recognizes

The award is about far more than celebrating brilliant ideas. It evaluates how those ideas have been transformed into successful businesses capable of growing while leveraging intellectual property as a strategic asset.

Selection criteria include the company’s business model and existing IP portfolio, its international growth strategy, its corporate culture around intellectual property and its potential social impact.

In other words, WIPO does not simply reward extraordinary inventions. It recognizes companies that have built a solid strategy around innovation, one capable of competing in global markets. That is precisely what makes the award so interesting, even beyond the IP community.

The Most Remarkable and Ingenious Inventions

Among this year’s 33 finalists, several stories stand out for their originality and ingenuity, regardless of whether they ultimately won.

Palmear (United Arab Emirates) developed patented bioacoustic sensors capable of detecting the red palm weevil, a destructive pest that spends roughly 80% of its life cycle hidden inside palm trunks. In less than 20 seconds, the system determines whether a tree is infected, without requiring specialized personnel. The idea was inspired by founder Zeid Sinokrot, who watched the pest devastate his family’s farm near Jericho.

Manetho (Egypt) created an AI-powered platform that recognizes and translates Egyptian hieroglyphs in real time from a simple photograph, while also enriching museum artifacts with augmented reality storytelling. Every year, millions of tourists stand before ancient inscriptions unable to understand them. This technology aims to bridge that gap.

SPACECOOL (Japan) developed an ultra-thin cooling film that reflects sunlight while radiating heat into the atmosphere, cooling surfaces without consuming electricity. Already installed in more than 10,000 locations worldwide, it has been applied to rooftops and walls of buildings, data centers, livestock facilities, logistics warehouses and even the Expo 2025 Osaka site. The company originated as a spin-off of the Osaka Gas Group.

Guardian Sports (United States) designed a soft-shell cover that fits over existing American football helmets, absorbing the energy from repeated impacts without relying on sensors or mobile apps. Today, it is worn by more than 500,000 athletes, from youth leagues all the way to the NFL.

Mirai Tech (Kazakhstan) embedded self-powered sensors into running insoles that continuously generate biomechanical data on knees, ankles and hips using only the athlete’s movement, eliminating the need for external batteries. The goal is to prevent injuries and protect joint health. In the newly introduced Sports category, however, the award ultimately went to Bearmind (Switzerland), whose helmet-integrated sensors monitor athletes’ brain health in contact sports.

Phabuilder (China) developed a bacterial fermentation process that uses seawater as a culture medium to produce bioplastics, reducing energy consumption by more than 50% compared with conventional production methods.

These stories differ greatly, yet they all share a common thread: transforming a real-world problem, often one experienced firsthand, into a practical, protected technological solution.

A Common Thread: Protect Before You Launch

Reading the profiles of the 33 finalists reveals a striking pattern. Nearly all of them filed patents, trademarks or industrial designs before bringing their products to market, not afterward.

For example, AgZen openly states that no product reaches commercial launch until the necessary IP protections are already in place. INFIRA patented its technology in Argentina before beginning its international expansion through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) system.

This is more than a legal precaution. It is a strategic decision that accompanies a company through its most vulnerable stages, when an idea can still be easily copied. Protecting innovation before scaling allows businesses to negotiate partnerships, attract investors and enter international markets from a position of strength, rather than scrambling for legal protection after damage has already been done.

The Bigger Picture

Looking at this year’s finalists offers a different perspective on innovation than the one we often hear about. Innovation is not confined to major technology hubs. It emerges from a livestock farm in Kenya, a family farm near Jericho or a university laboratory in Kazakhstan.

Nor is it the exclusive domain of multinational corporations. Many of the most original solutions come from small and medium-sized enterprises founded by people seeking to solve problems they encountered in their own lives.

One more aspect stands out. In these stories, intellectual property never appears as a bureaucratic burden or an expense to postpone. Instead, it is presented as an integral part of the innovation process itself, just as essential as the technology it protects.

Perhaps that is the most compelling message conveyed by the WIPO Global Awards 2026. Great ideas can emerge anywhere, but they become successful businesses only when someone chooses to protect them with the same care that went into creating them.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo WIPO Global Awards 2026: Where Innovation Meets Intellectual Property proviene da Aglatech14.

Behind every medical device package lie three closely connected elements that are rarely discussed together: the materials used to manufacture it, the European regulations it must comply with, and the language in which the required information is presented. These three aspects influence one another and should be considered together from the very beginning, not addressed one after another.

Sterile Barrier Systems: More Than Just “Containers”

In the medical device industry, a packaging system is designed to meet highly specific requirements. Examples include thermoformed trays for cleanroom environments, blister packs with Tyvek® lids to provide a complete microbial barrier, aluminium foil laminates for products sensitive to light or moisture, multi-panel cartons with inserts for package leaflets, and booklet labels used when the required information exceeds the available space on the primary packaging.

In practice, sealing these packages requires millimetre-level precision. If the film does not adhere perfectly, the device may lose its sterility before it even reaches the operating theatre. The way the package is opened is equally important. Medical-grade peelable films, commonly known as easy-peel materials, must separate cleanly and in a controlled manner, without leaving fibre residues that could contaminate the sterile field during a procedure.

The general requirements for packaging and sterility are defined internationally by ISO 11607, the reference standard for the design of packaging intended for terminally sterilised medical devices.

2026 Regulatory Updates Affecting Medical Device Packaging

From a regulatory perspective, 2026 is proving to be a particularly significant year for medical device packaging.

The New EU REP Symbol  In June 2026, the European Commission published an update officially introducing the EU REP symbol to replace the previous EC REP symbol identifying the Authorised Representative. Although this may appear to be only a graphical change, it directly affects labels, instructions for use (IFUs), packaging and technical documentation. Manufacturers have a five-year transition period, allowing the new symbol to be incorporated into normal packaging revision cycles.

EUDAMED Becomes Fully Operational  As of 28 May 2026, four key modules of the European EUDAMED database became mandatory. Manufacturers, authorised representatives and importers are now required to register economic operators, medical devices (including their UDI-DI) and certificates.

For companies managing packaging across multiple markets, this means that label information, UDI carriers and registration data must remain fully consistent across all commercialisation languages. Otherwise, the consequences may extend beyond regulatory non-compliance to customs delays or interruptions in product distribution.

ISO 15223-1 Symbols Help Optimise Space  With the continued evolution of the harmonised EN ISO 15223-1 standard, which now includes 68 recognised symbols, many manufacturers are replacing text with standardised pictograms. This allows them to save valuable space on small packages without compromising regulatory compliance.

The overall regulatory framework remains the EU Medical Device Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR), which also establishes the language requirements applicable to labels and instructions for use.

The Role of Language in Medical Device Packaging

This brings us to the aspect that matters most from a linguistic perspective. More importantly, however, it is an industrial process issue rather than simply a translation task.

A medical device marketed in Europe may require information in a selection of the 24 official EU languages, while each Member State defines its own rules regarding which information must be translated and whether it is intended for professional or lay users.

When all this information must fit onto a booklet label, a multi-panel carton or a tray whose available space has already been reduced by symbols, UDI codes and sterility warnings, the challenge is no longer simply producing an accurate translation. It becomes a matter of ensuring that the linguistic content fits within the physical constraints of the packaging.

Romance languages, for example, generally require more characters than English to express the same concept. This is a detail that packaging designers need to consider before finalising the artwork, not afterwards. It represents one of the most common points of friction between graphic design teams, regulatory affairs specialists and language professionals, and helps explain why an increasing number of medical device manufacturers rely on centralised terminology management and multi-level review workflows shared across different departments.

This is a reality we know well from practical experience. At Aglatech14, we regularly translate artwork for a company operating in the herbal and phytotherapy sector, producing food supplements, medical devices and plant-based natural cosmetics distributed across several European markets.

Our work goes far beyond translating the text. Depending on the content and target language, we frequently support the desktop publishing process as well, ensuring that the translated version fits the layout of the original artwork without compromising the readability of critical information such as sterility warnings or instructions for use. This requires close collaboration with the client’s graphic design department to ensure that every language version complies both with regulatory information requirements and with the physical constraints of the packaging itself.

Packaging as an Integrated System, Not a Final Production Step

The common thread connecting packaging systems, regulatory symbols, EUDAMED and multilingual content is easy to describe but far more complex to manage. In the medical device industry, packaging is not finalised first and translated afterwards. It is developed as an integrated system, where every design revision, every regulatory update and every new target market triggers a chain of changes that must remain fully synchronised.

A delay or inconsistency in even a single language can result in an entire batch being held at customs, lead to audit non-conformities, or require costly reprinting and production delays. In this context, language is no longer the final step in the process. It becomes an integral part of designing a regulated product, just like selecting the appropriate packaging material or choosing the correct regulatory symbol.

As regulatory requirements continue to grow more complex and destination markets become increasingly fragmented, the integration of packaging design, materials and multilingual information is likely to become even closer in the coming years. Anyone involved in designing packaging for medical devices, regardless of their role, will increasingly need to think in terms of integrated systems rather than isolated stages.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo Medical Device Packaging: Safety, Regulations, and Multilingual Management proviene da Aglatech14.

A quick reminder of the timeline

Before looking at the latest developments, it is worth briefly recalling the implementation schedule. The Regulation was published on 29 June 2023 in the Official Journal of the European Union, available on the EUR-Lex website, and entered into force twenty days later. Some provisions, including those concerning the notification of conformity assessment bodies, have already applied since 2024.

Most of the substantive obligations, however, will only become applicable on 20 January 2027, when the Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC will be fully repealed. With approximately six months remaining until that date, 2026 represents the final opportunity for companies to complete their compliance efforts, both from a technical and documentation perspective.

Harmonised standards: an issue still under development

One of the most closely monitored topics for manufacturers and compliance professionals is the status of the harmonised standards. The European standardisation organisations CEN and CENELEC are currently revising hundreds of technical standards to align them with the new requirements of the Regulation, particularly those relating to artificial intelligence, software, and cybersecurity resilience. According to the European Commission’s dedicated webpage, the objective is to adopt, by the end of 2026, an implementing decision containing the complete list of harmonised standards supporting the new Regulation.

In the meantime, the Commission has already adopted several implementing decisions updating the relevant standard references, with the latest published during the first months of 2026. Newly issued European standards will include not only the traditional Annex ZA, which relates to the former Machinery Directive, but also a new Annex ZB specifically addressing the Machinery Regulation. For companies, this means that much of their technical documentation will need to be reviewed, even where it is based on long-established standards that have been successfully applied for years.

This situation creates a degree of operational uncertainty. Many manufacturers are waiting for the final list of harmonised standards before carrying out a comprehensive revision of their technical files, in order to avoid having to repeat the process several times within the same year.

The Commission’s implementation guide

As was the case under the Machinery Directive, the new Regulation will also be accompanied by an official implementation guide designed to clarify its practical interpretation. The drafting working group met for the first time in January 2025, and work continued throughout the following year with the participation of national experts and industry associations.

The final guide is expected to be published by the end of 2026, in line with the Commission’s stated objective for the harmonised standards list, although draft versions may circulate informally before the official publication. This document will be particularly valuable in clarifying issues that remain open to interpretation, such as the treatment of substantial modifications to existing machinery and the application of the new requirements to partly completed machinery.

Companies involved in revamping and retrofitting production lines are closely following these developments, as the guidance will influence many practical decisions, including when modifications to an installation require a new conformity assessment.

The connection with the Cyber Resilience Act and NIS2

Among the most significant recent developments is the growing alignment between the Machinery Regulation and the EU’s broader cybersecurity legislation. The Cyber Resilience Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/2847) introduces horizontal cybersecurity requirements for products with digital elements, while the NIS2 Directive strengthens the resilience of information systems at organisational level.

The Machinery Regulation forms part of this wider legislative framework and follows the principles of the New Legislative Framework (NLF), the package of legislation adopted in 2008 (Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 and Decision No 768/2008/EC) establishing common rules for CE marking, accreditation of conformity assessment bodies and the obligations of economic operators across the EU’s product legislation.

This means that definitions such as manufacturer, authorised representative, importer, and distributor are harmonised across different regulations, together with a consistent approach to risk assessment. For manufacturers producing machinery with electronic components or embedded software, cybersecurity is therefore no longer a separate compliance issue but an integral part of the overall product safety strategy.

Machinery subject to mandatory third-party assessment

Another important update concerns the list of high-risk machinery contained in Annex I of the Regulation. Six categories of machinery and related products will require mandatory assessment by a notified body, regardless of whether harmonised standards have been applied:

• detachable mechanical transmission devices, including their guards;
• guards for detachable mechanical transmission devices;
• vehicle service lifts;
• portable cartridge-operated fixing and other impact machinery;
• safety components incorporating fully or partially self-evolving behaviour (machine learning) that perform safety functions;
• machinery integrating systems with the same type of self-evolving behaviour, where such systems are not placed on the market independently.

Under the previous Machinery Directive, compliance with harmonised standards could often be sufficient to demonstrate conformity. Under the new Regulation, this will no longer be the case for these specific categories.

This change will have a direct impact on certification timelines and costs for the manufacturers concerned. Companies will need to involve notified bodies much earlier in the conformity assessment process, particularly as their capacity is limited and demand is expected to increase significantly as the 2027 application date approaches.

What changes for technical documentation

Recent developments confirm a trend that had already emerged: the quality and consistency of technical documentation remain fundamental, but the scope of documentation requirements is expanding. Every document will need to accurately reflect the new provisions relating to artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and substantial modifications, in line with the guidance that will be provided by the Commission’s implementation guide.

Language requirements also remain critical. Instruction manuals and EU declarations of conformity must continue to be translated into the official language(s) of every Member State where the machinery is placed on the market. However, the terminology involved is becoming increasingly sophisticated, covering areas such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and self-evolving systems. In this context, an inaccurate translation is no longer merely a linguistic issue, it may directly affect the product’s compliance.

Companies that have already started reviewing their technical documentation should closely monitor the publication of both the final list of harmonised standards and the Commission’s official implementation guide, both expected, according to the Commission’s stated objectives, by the end of 2026. Updating and translating instruction manuals, declarations of conformity and internal procedures well in advance remains the most effective way to be fully prepared for 20 January 2027, avoiding last-minute compliance challenges.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo EU Machinery Regulation: Where We Stand Ahead of 2027 proviene da Aglatech14.

A significant indicator comes from WIPO‘s (World Intellectual Property Organization) Patent Landscape Report: patent families related to generative AI increased from approximately 700 in 2014 to more than 14,000 in 2023. This extraordinary growth confirms that AI is now one of the most dynamic and strategically important technology areas worldwide. For patent firms, trademark consultants, and IP departments, the issue is no longer limited to protecting new technologies. AI is changing the very way professionals work, analyse information, support clients, and make decisions.

Let us summarize the key trends that deserve attention in this sector.

1. From Generative AI to Intelligent Agents

Over the past few years, attention has focused on generative models capable of producing text, summaries, and content.

The next phase will be characterized by intelligent agents. Unlike traditional chatbots, these systems do not simply answer questions. They can retrieve information from multiple sources, plan tasks, use external tools, and complete complex workflows with increasing levels of autonomy. In the IP sector, this could translate into activities such as continuous competitor monitoring, automated technology intelligence gathering, preparation of preliminary analyses, and generation of strategic reports.

The objective is not to replace professionals but to reduce the time spent on repetitive tasks and allow them to focus on higher-value decisions.

2. The Era of Multimodal AI

Another trend expected to have a significant impact is the rise of multimodal AI.

The most advanced models no longer work exclusively with text. They can understand and correlate documents, images, technical drawings, charts, tables, and other information formats. For the patent world, this represents a major evolution. Relevant information is not contained solely in textual descriptions but often also in drawings, figures, and accompanying technical documentation.

The ability to analyse all these sources simultaneously opens new opportunities for technology scouting, competitive intelligence, and IP portfolio analysis.

3. From Automation to Decision Intelligence

For years, AI was primarily discussed as a tool for automating operational tasks. Today, the focus is shifting toward what is known as decision intelligence.

Organizations are increasingly looking for tools capable not only of processing information but also of rapidly transforming it into strategic business insights. In the IP sector, demand is growing for solutions that provide an immediate overview of portfolios, highlight opportunities and risks, support renewal decisions, and offer a deeper understanding of competitors’ strategies.

Intellectual property is increasingly viewed as a strategic asset. As a result, the value of tools that connect technical data, legal information, and business objectives continues to grow.

4. Explainable AI: Transparency Becomes Essential

As AI adoption increases, a clearer requirement is emerging: understanding how results are generated.

In the IP sector, obtaining an answer is not enough. It is essential to verify the sources used, understand the reasoning process followed by the system, and assess the reliability of its conclusions.

For this reason, one of the most relevant trends is Explainable AI (XAI), meaning transparent and verifiable artificial intelligence. The ability to inspect and validate the reasoning behind a result will become increasingly important in high-impact activities such as patent analysis, strategic assessments, and due diligence processes.

5. The Value of Integration

In recent years, the market has seen a proliferation of specialized tools for research, analysis, monitoring, and IP portfolio management.

Today, however, the primary need does not appear to be the introduction of yet another platform, but rather the ability to make existing systems work together.

The most evident trend is the search for integrated ecosystems in which data, workflows, and tools operate in a coordinated manner. For IP professionals, this means less fragmentation, greater access to information, and faster decision-making processes.

The Linguistic Factor: When Words Define Rights

Among the areas where AI continues to require particular attention is the management of IP documentation.

Unlike many other professional content domains, in patents and related documents words do not serve merely a descriptive function. They contribute directly to defining the scope of protection and the interpretation of rights. For this reason, linguistic accuracy and technical accuracy cannot be considered separately. AI is rapidly improving its understanding of specialized language and already provides valuable support for document analysis and knowledge management. However, intellectual property frequently presents situations in which seemingly equivalent terms carry different meanings depending on the technical context, jurisdiction, or protection strategy being pursued. Consider patent claims, where wording that is too narrow or too broad can materially affect the scope of protection. Or the need to maintain terminological consistency across dozens of documents filed in different countries over many years.

Rather than replacing specialist expertise, the evolution of AI appears to reinforce the importance of human validation in contexts where precision, consistency, and interpretability of language have legal and strategic implications.

Beyond Technology: A Matter of Methodology

Intelligent agents, multimodal AI, decision-support systems, and increasingly integrated platforms are reshaping the intellectual property landscape.

However, the challenge for law firms and IP departments is not simply adopting new tools. The real challenge is understanding where these technologies can generate tangible value and where specialist expertise, professional judgment, and human oversight remain indispensable. In a field where every decision may have significant technical, economic, and legal implications, AI represents a major opportunity, but it also requires methodology, governance, and critical thinking.

For this reason, it may be useful to pause and reflect on a few questions:

• In which activities is AI already generating measurable and tangible benefits for our firm or IP department?
• Do we have the necessary expertise and procedures to verify and validate AI-generated results?
• How do we ensure confidentiality of information and the quality of the data used by AI systems?
• Are the tools we use truly integrated into our processes, or are they creating additional layers of complexity?
• Which activities will continue to require specialist expertise and human oversight, even in a scenario of increasing automation?

There is no one-size-fits-all answer. Every organization will need to find its own balance between technological innovation and professional expertise.

What is becoming increasingly evident, however, is that the value of AI will depend not only on the quality of the available tools but also on the ability to integrate them into robust, controlled, and business-oriented processes.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo From Intelligent Agents to Multimodal AI: The New Trends in Intellectual Property proviene da Aglatech14.

1. “Just translate it, and everything else will fall into place”

This is the most common mistake and also the most deceptive. Translating does not automatically mean communicating. Content can be linguistically flawless and yet completely ineffective from a communication perspective. Translation transfers words; localization transfers meaning. Without this second step, the message never truly “lands” in the target market, and the risk is speaking without being heard.

2. “Our industry is technical, so adaptation isn’t necessary”

Quite the opposite. The more technical the content, the more precise, consistent, and well-managed the terminology needs to be over time. Every industry, whether medical, legal, engineering, or IT, has its own specialized vocabulary, which can vary from country to country and sometimes even from region to region. Without structured terminology management, inconsistencies and ambiguities can creep in, potentially leading to serious consequences in certain contexts.

3. “Machine translation is good enough nowadays”

Machine translation engines and generative AI tools are powerful solutions that continue to evolve, but they are designed primarily to convert, not to communicate. They can produce grammatically acceptable texts that often lack the right tone, context, and cultural nuances. Even when the output appears smooth and natural, it may contain terminological inaccuracies or use a register that is inappropriate for the target audience. Without professional post-editing, the final result can sound mechanical, off-brand, or even misleading. Speed alone does not compensate for these limitations, especially when a company’s brand is at stake.

4. “A quick review is enough”

Review is not a superficial check, it is a critical stage of the process. A thorough review verifies consistency with the source text, terminological accuracy, stylistic quality, and overall readability. Skipping this step, or treating it lightly, means exposing yourself to mistakes that could have been easily avoided. Over time, these errors undermine content credibility and, by extension, brand reputation.

5. “One translation works for every country that speaks the same language”

Spanish, English, French, and Portuguese are spoken in dozens of countries, each with its own lexical variations, idiomatic expressions, and cultural sensitivities. A text created for the Spanish market will not automatically resonate in Latin America, just as British English content may feel unnatural to an American audience. Treating a language as a single, uniform entity means overlooking the differences that make it relevant and authentic in each context where it is spoken.

6. “Managing everything internally is easier”

In theory, that sounds reasonable. In practice, it is often the opposite. Without a structured process and clearly defined roles, in-house multilingual content management tends to create bottlenecks, quality issues, and version-control problems. The real issue is not who manages the process, but how it is managed and whether the right expertise is involved. A clear, coordinated, and scalable workflow is essential, supported by native-speaking language professionals who can ensure quality regardless of who executes it.

7. “Specialized tools aren’t essential”

They absolutely are. Translation memories, CAT tools, and quality assurance systems are not optional extras or shortcuts, they are what ensure terminological consistency, reduce costs over time, and make the process scalable. Relying solely on Word files and email exchanges is not a neutral choice; it is a choice with costs that often remain hidden until problems begin to surface

8. “Every piece of content is a separate project”

Treating multilingual content as isolated assets is one of the most expensive mistakes in terms of both time and resources. Content does not exist independently, it overlaps, references other content, and evolves over time. Managing it as an ecosystem, with consistency across versions, synchronized updates, and shared linguistic resources, allows teams to work more efficiently while avoiding the fragmentation that eventually becomes unmanageable.

9. “We’ll translate it at the end, it’s quick anyway”

Considering multilingual content translation only after a project has been completed is a strategic mistake. Content created without translation in mind often contains untranslatable wordplay, overly complex sentence structures, or cultural references that are difficult to adapt. Integrating multilingual thinking from the very beginning, by creating clear, modular, and culturally neutral content, makes the entire process smoother and more effective.

10. “Subtitles can be translated automatically”

Subtitles are often treated as a secondary element, almost an aesthetic addition. In reality, they are a critical component of multilingual communication and not only that. They are also a key accessibility tool, enabling people with hearing impairments, viewers watching without sound, and non-native speakers to fully understand the message.

Poorly translated or superficially adapted subtitles compromise readability, weaken SEO performance in the target language, and can even distort the meaning of an entire section. Reading habits vary across markets: in some cultures, subtitles are the first element viewers read; in others, they influence whether people continue engaging with the content or abandon it.

Carefully adapting subtitles, taking into account tone, length, local keywords, and accessibility standards, is not a minor detail. It is an integral part of an inclusive content strategy that genuinely works.

Conclusion

Multilingual content management is not an operational task to be delegated at the last minute. It is a strategic lever that, when used effectively, transforms translation into a genuine driver of international growth. Overcoming these ten misconceptions is the first step toward building multilingual communication that truly works.

If your content needs to speak to multiple markets, it needs to do so in the right way. Every language is an opportunity, one that a superficial approach risks wasting.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo The 10 Most Common Mistakes in Multilingual Content Management (and How to Avoid Them) proviene da Aglatech14.

A new phase is emerging in which the availability and interpretation of data increasingly influence healthcare policy decisions. In this context, the quality of the information being recorded, classified and communicated is becoming more important than ever, with implications for planning, vigilance activities and health technology assessment.

Registries Are Not Archives: They Are Governance Tools

In the debate surrounding medical device governance, registries are playing an increasingly significant role. These are structured systems designed to collect and analyse data relating to specific categories of devices or clinical pathways, with the aim of monitoring their use, safety, effectiveness and outcomes over time. Implantable device registries, in particular, because of their substantial clinical and economic impact, are now considered strategic healthcare governance tools, supporting not only traceability but also outcome evaluation, healthcare planning and public decision-making processes.

These systems are used to assess long-term outcomes, support Health Technology Assessment (HTA), guide reimbursement decisions and optimise public spending, operating as living systems fuelled by real-world data and real-time data. A concrete example is the Italian Breast Implant Registry, established by Law No. 86/2012 and made mandatory through Ministerial Decree No. 207/2022. As the first mandatory national registry dedicated to an implantable medical device, its official objectives include clinical monitoring to prevent complications, rapid patient traceability, and epidemiological surveillance to evaluate effectiveness and safety in both the short and long term.

The scale of the phenomenon is reflected in the national medical device vigilance network, which manages nearly 10,000 reports each year involving incidents, malfunctions, complaints and corrective actions related to medical devices and in vitro diagnostic devices (IVDs). This number continues to grow, demonstrating how the issue encompasses clinical, organisational, economic and regulatory dimensions. And, as we shall see, linguistic ones as well.

AI Enters the Picture: Powerful, but Not Infallible When It Comes to Language

The Italian Ministry of Health has begun using artificial intelligence to correlate consumption data, procurement contracts, Essential Levels of Care (LEA), and contract award price monitoring. The objective is not to automate clinical decisions, but to build a governance system capable of identifying complex signals in real time and responding more quickly and effectively.

This represents a tangible shift, but it also raises a crucial issue: in healthcare and regulatory environments, data is never just data. Specialist terminology, classifications and definitions continuously evolve and can take on different meanings depending on the regulatory framework in which they are used.

The introduction of the new national CID classification system (Classification and Identification of Devices), intended to replace the current National Classification of Medical Devices (CND), is a clear example. For this reason, we believe that the effectiveness of AI cannot be separated from robust terminology governance and qualified linguistic oversight. Only in this way can consistency, reliability and the correct interpretation of information be ensured throughout the entire data lifecycle.

One of the structural challenges most frequently cited by industry stakeholders concerns divergent interpretations among national authorities. Ultimately, this is also a language issue, because certain concepts do not travel in the same way from one legal system to another, from one language to another, or from one classification framework to its successor.

Linguistic Register as a Strategic Variable

The concept of linguistic register, namely the ability to adopt the appropriate tone, terminology and level of formality for a specific context, is becoming a critical competency for professionals working in the medical device sector. Regulatory documentation, databases, classifications and guidance documents all require a level of linguistic precision that leaves no room for approximation.

An inaccurate translation of a device classification, a term rendered inconsistently between Italian and European guidance documents, or a slightly altered definition within an implementation act can generate operational, legal and, in the worst cases, clinical consequences.

This need for precision applies across all key communication areas within the sector:

• Documents submitted to competent authorities and notified bodies, where any inaccuracy may result in delays or non-compliance.
• Manufacturers’ technical documentation, which must remain consistent and verifiable in every part.
• Translations of European regulations and guidance documents, where approximate equivalence may alter the original legal meaning.
• Content intended for healthcare professionals and patients, which requires a different register but no less linguistic control.

A Practical Example: When Compliance Depends on Terminology

The importance of terminological control becomes particularly evident in large-scale regulatory translation projects. One project managed by Aglatech14 involved translating the technical documentation of an Italian manufacturer specialising in infection control solutions into 22 European Union languages, in compliance with MDR 2017/745. The project included user manuals intended for physicians and healthcare professionals and required continuous updates throughout the project lifecycle.

The challenge was not simply the number of languages involved, but above all the need to guarantee terminological consistency, regulatory compliance and documentary uniformity across all versions. To achieve this, a multidisciplinary team was coordinated using shared terminology management and quality assurance tools, bringing together specialised linguists and professionals with specific expertise in the regulatory field.

Projects such as this demonstrate that, within the medical device sector, linguistic quality is not an accessory element of compliance; it is one of its essential components.

Finding the Balance: AI and Specialist Review Working Together

It would be a mistake to position artificial intelligence and human expertise as opposing forces. The sector does not need this oversimplification, and the market has already recognised that. AI is a powerful tool for processing large volumes of regulatory text, identifying patterns in vigilance data and accelerating document management. However, terminological consistency, sensitivity to legal context and the ability to distinguish intentional ambiguity from drafting inaccuracies still require expert human intervention that cannot be replaced by processing speed alone.

The most effective combination is AI plus specialised review: the speed of automated processing combined with the precision of professionals who understand how to interpret a European regulation within its proper context and transfer it into another language or format without losing meaning along the way. This is the post-editing model applied to high-risk documentation, ensuring that the intended meaning reaches its destination intact, together with all its legal and operational implications.

Why This Matters for Language Professionals in the Sector

The developments of 2026 confirm that the medical device industry is undergoing profound transformation. Manufacturers, consultants, specialised law firms and notified bodies are all managing increasing volumes of regulatory documentation across multiple languages and under ever more demanding standards.

In this environment, professionals who work with language, whether specialised translators, technical writers, legal linguists or scientific communicators, must be fully integrated into the compliance process, bearing direct responsibility for the quality and reliability of the content being produced.

In a system where data becomes governance, where registries become instruments of healthcare policy, and where AI analyses contracts and procurement prices in real time, the quality of what is written, translated and communicated has never been more strategic, nor more difficult to improvise.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo Data, Registries, and AI: How Medical Device Governance and Language Are Changing proviene da Aglatech14.

This is not a hypothetical scenario but an everyday reality in global supply chains. When supply networks involve dozens of countries, hundreds of suppliers, and thousands of technical documents, terminology is not merely a linguistic matter but a critical factor that directly affects costs, delivery times, and regulatory compliance.

The Invisible Problem: When Terms Are More Than Just Words

Supply chain management operates through a highly codified and specialized language. We are talking about Incoterms, Harmonized System codes, specific customs terminology, international logistics abbreviations, and transportation management acronyms. This technical vocabulary leaves no room for interpretation or approximation.

Paradoxically, the same concept can be expressed in different ways even within the same language. In Italian, for example, “supply chain” may be translated as catena di approvvigionamento, catena di fornitura, filiera, or simply left in English. This lack of consistency creates operational confusion: a buyer may refer to “lead time,” a logistics manager to “delivery time,” and a manufacturer to “throughput time,” all essentially referring to the same concept while generating misunderstandings within business processes.

In regulatory and customs contexts, where precision is essential, more than 75% of companies report difficulties in maintaining consistent international standards, primarily due to regulatory fragmentation. When a technical term is misinterpreted and results in non-compliant documentation, the consequences include customs holds, administrative penalties, and delays that ripple throughout the entire supply chain.

Critical Challenges in Global Communication

Language barriers are only the tip of the iceberg. When Asian suppliers, European manufacturers, and American distributors collaborate, linguistic and cultural differences complicate communication and the understanding of local requirements. Simply translating a technical term is not enough; organizations must interpret the context, understand local regulatory implications, and ensure that every stakeholder in the supply chain shares the same operational understanding.

Another critical issue concerns data quality and alignment across legacy systems, cloud platforms, IoT sensors, and departmental tools that do not communicate with one another. This technological fragmentation makes it difficult to maintain consistent terminology glossaries. A company may have an ERP system that uses one set of codes, a Warehouse Management System (WMS) with different naming conventions, and Transportation Management Systems (TMS) that introduce further variations for the same concept.

The lack of internal standardization further exacerbates the problem. Many organizations do not maintain centralized termbases or shared terminology databases. Each branch, department, and partner may use slightly different terminology, creating a corporate Tower of Babel in which the same operation is described in multiple ways.

Incoterms: The Perfect Example of Critical Terminology

Incoterms (International Commercial Terms) are perhaps the clearest example of how standardized technical terminology is essential to global operations. Published and regularly updated by the International Chamber of Commerce, these eleven trade terms precisely define responsibilities, costs, and risks between sellers and buyers in international transactions.

We are talking about acronyms such as EXW (Ex Works), FCA (Free Carrier), FOB (Free On Board), CIF (Cost, Insurance and Freight), DAP (Delivered At Place), and DDP (Delivered Duty Paid). Each acronym precisely defines where responsibility begins and ends, who pays for transportation, who handles insurance, and who manages customs procedures.

Incoterms are globally recognized and accepted by governments, customs authorities, and courts around the world. However, their value is fully realized only when all supply chain stakeholders, from buyers and freight forwarders to customs brokers and logistics managers, understand and apply them correctly. For detailed specifications and the latest updates, the International Chamber of Commerce provides comprehensive official resources.

Technology and Terminology Management: Solutions That Work

Leading companies in global supply chain management have developed precise technological strategies to address terminology challenges. Terminology databases and termbases form the backbone of this approach. Specialized software centralizes multilingual corporate glossaries by associating terms with metadata, usage guidelines, contextual information, and relationship mapping, enabling more targeted and effective searches across target languages.

Translation Management Systems (TMS) ensure consistency in technical translations. By reusing previous translations and repetitive content, these systems accelerate translation workflows and maintain client-specific terminology for accurate results. Translation memories ensure that once a technical term has been validated, it is translated consistently across all future documents.

The most advanced organizations take a proactive approach by identifying new terminology during the product or process development phase, before localization begins and in close collaboration with technical teams. This model, widely adopted by large international organizations, contrasts with the traditional reactive approach in which terminology is documented only after a translation issue emerges.

Integration with supply chain management platforms is equally critical. Modern platforms function as multichannel web layers integrated with corporate ERP systems, harmonizing data from different sources. Shared dashboards allow all stakeholders to view the same terminology, reducing ambiguity and accelerating decision-making processes.

Artificial intelligence is also playing an increasingly important role in technical translation, with neural engines trained on industry-specific terminology. However, human intervention remains indispensable. Only experienced professionals can guarantee quality, cultural adaptation, and regulatory compliance. Technology accelerates and standardizes processes, but final validation still requires specialized human expertise.

Best Practices for Supply Chain-Proof Terminology

Creating and maintaining centralized glossaries is the essential first step. Every company operating internationally should maintain shared termbases accessible to all departments and, where appropriate, to strategic supply chain partners. These glossaries are not simple lists of translations but dynamic tools that include definitions, usage contexts, practical examples, and approved variations.

Team training is often underestimated. Not only professional translators but also buyers, logistics managers, customs specialists, and customer service representatives must understand the sector’s critical terminology. Investing in internal workshops on technical terminology, Incoterms, and customs codes reduces costly mistakes and accelerates operational processes.

Standardizing terminology validation processes means documenting clear procedures for introducing new terms into target languages. Who has the authority to validate a technical translation? How are regional variations of the same term managed? What criteria determine the preferred translation among several alternatives? Answering these questions through documented policies prevents arbitrary decisions and inconsistencies.

Collaboration with qualified partners is equally essential. Certified customs brokers, translators specialized in industrial and logistics documentation, and consultants with sector-specific expertise can make the difference between a smooth shipment and a customs blockage lasting weeks.

Regular monitoring and terminology audits of operational documents help identify inconsistencies before they become costly problems. Quarterly reviews of critical documents, such as customs declarations, supplier contracts, and technical specifications, ensure that terminology remains compliant and consistent over time.

Investing in technology without neglecting the human element represents the winning balance. Managing technical terminology consistently not only improves understanding but also strengthens corporate reputation. Advanced software, artificial intelligence, and automation accelerate processes, but specialized human expertise remains essential for cultural adaptation, regulatory interpretation, and exception management.

Conclusion

Technical terminology in global supply chains is far more than a detail confined to translation activities. It is a strategic asset that determines competitiveness, operational efficiency, and regulatory compliance for companies operating internationally.

In an environment where supply chains are becoming increasingly complex, interconnected, and subject to stringent regulations, effective terminology management translates directly into reduced operational risks, optimized quality-related costs, and improved compliance across diverse markets.

A final question to consider: does your company maintain a centralized and regularly updated terminology glossary? Do your international partners, including suppliers, carriers, and customs brokers, truly speak the same technical language when it comes to Incoterms, HS codes, and customs documentation? In a world where a single misunderstood term can stop a container, the answer to these questions is worth far more than it may seem.

Aglatech14 ContenTalkers

L'articolo Global Supply Chains and Technical Terminology: When Words Become Barriers proviene da Aglatech14.