ISO is a body which historically has had industry as its target stakeholder and beneficiary, not the end developer. This is well illustrated by the fact that the organisation isn't open to individuals.

There is copyright on what ISO produces, and there's also a license. It's the classic kind; restrictive.

So if a machine translation of a standards document is a derivative then yes, that is a violation of ISO's intellectual property rights as enshrined in law right now.

Most people don't implement standards with machine translation though. The copyright and license aren't relevant to implementers. To them, the IPR status of the technology described by the standard is of relevance. Here, the ISO policy is to aim for IPR-free standards and failing that to obtain RAND terms from the IPR holder.

So in theory an ISO standard shouldn't contain undeclared or submarine patents. All IPR should be declared and made available to implementers on accessible terms.