Smart Glasses Have Privacy Advocates Scrambling

Smart glasses are a bit controversial right now, and for good reason. In a lot of ways, they’re a privacy nightmare.

It’s hard to tell when people are recording with them, making them useful for, uh, all sorts of bad stuff. They can be used for things like cheating on the SATs or lying in court. And to make matters worse, Meta, the biggest name in the space, has been sending videos taken with its Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses to be reviewed by human subcontractors. Some of those videos, by the way, contained highly sensitive material, like people using the bathroom, having sex, or banking and credit card information. Some of them were also recorded accidentally.

All of that controversy combined has created some discussion around, frankly, what the f*ck to do with their sudden popularity, and a feeling of general anxiety over smart glasses has clearly escalated to a legislative level. As reported by Nola.com, a new bill put forth by Rep. Laurie Schlegel, R-La., proposed in the Louisiana State House, would tweak recording-consent rules to better address technology like smart glasses. And yes, the proposed piece of legislation even goes as far as to name smart glasses specifically, as well as some of the unwanted outcomes they’ve spurred. Here’s a taste:

“Recent incidents have highlighted the misuse of wearable recording devices such as smart glasses for covertly filming individuals without their consent. These recordings are often disseminated on social media platforms, leading to harassment and violations of personal privacy.”

The bill, as bills tend to do, gets fairly in the weeds, but it mostly deals with further defining a few things, including what a “direct conversation” is and when “a device” can be used to “record or transcribe a direct conversation with another party,” as well as whether both parties need to be privy to the recording.

I’ll be honest, as important as defining and bolstering privacy laws has become, this proposed bill feels a bit hamfisted to me. As Nola.com notes, Louisiana is currently a one-party state, meaning only one party has to be aware of a recording for it to be legally allowed. Those laws may sound strange, but they can actually benefit people chronicling abuse, whistleblowers, and even journalists like myself, who are more easily (and legally) allowed to record interviews without fear of legal backlash. Muddying those waters, while valid when it comes to protecting people against unwanted smart glasses recordings, might have some undesirable ripple effects.

To the proposed bill’s credit, it does make some important distinctions, retaining the right to record law enforcement and public meetings, as well as emergency cases where a crime is being committed, though smart glasses are a very specific issue and a very specific variety of device—it’s going to take a lot of nuance to get right. For now, the bill is purely theoretical, and if nothing else, it shows just how serious the conversations around privacy and smart glasses have become. Cruise ships banning them is one thing, but state-level legislation is a different ball game.

As I wrote recently, the whole category—thanks in part to recent fallout from revelations about Meta’s practices—seems to be spinning towards becoming Google Glass 2.0, and it’s not hard to understand why. Call me silly, but I’m starting to think maybe Meta wasn’t the ideal ambassador for a technology that’s primed to be used with ill intent.