It's not machine learning, but the text in other languages also isn't written by a lawyer according to the authors responses in this thread, so the risk of mistranslation and changed legal meanings is still there.
Legal vocabulary contains words that are terms of art which are then bastardized and changed in usage when used in lay discussion, leading to differential meanings.
Let's not even raise the issue of the language having dramatically different meanings and legal effects across jurisdictional lines even if the wording of the text is unchanged. Or the fact that best practices in drafting specific clauses might be changed in a few weeks following the release of new jurisprudence.
Variants of what?
So there's obviously an easy fix to the problems you outline, which are no fundamental problems.
Regarding legal expertise, I or anybody else could go through this with a lawyer next week and have a review, including a "pull request" of required changes, no more than a week later.
For the translation, of course the process was not copying and pasting words into Google Translate one by one and using the result. The translation process has been much more thorough.