Smart glasses in court are a privacy nightmare

When Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrived at a Los Angeles courthouse on Wednesday, he did so with a team that appeared to be wearing Ray-Ban smart glasses equipped with Meta’s cameras. Judge Caroline Cole was concerned. according to CNBCCole warned anyone who registered with the glasses: “If you have done this, you must delete it, otherwise you will be held in contempt of court.” Cole too commander Everyone wears AI smart glasses to remove them. Even after the warning, at least one person was there I saw you wearing glasses around the jury in the court lobby, despite being told by plaintiff’s attorney Rachel Lanier that the glasses were not recording at the time.

Glasses with recording capabilities have raised concerns about them Privacy, monitoring and authentication In all kinds of places, the courtroom is no exception. Earlier this month, a user on the Reddit subreddit r/legaladvice A post shared before Seek advice on reporting a plaintiff wearing glasses as dead to court. Additionally, in recent months, some states have moved to specifically ban smart glasses in court, including U.S. District Courts. Hawaii area and Western District of Wisconsin. Forsyth County Courthouse in North Carolina Smart glasses were also banned last year. Colorado District Court is Consider the ban also.

As smart glasses become more widespread, keeping stadiums safe from unwanted recording could become an uphill battle.

While banning smart glasses in courts may be a relatively recent development, restrictions on cameras and recording are not new. Since 1946, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53 It prohibited the recording or broadcast of criminal proceedings in federal courts. In 1972, the Judicial Conference of the United States also adopted a ban on recording and broadcasting of the courtroom and its surroundings, including civil and criminal cases. The only significant exception to these rules was in 2020, when the Judicial Conference temporarily allowed teleconferencing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, although that exception expires in 2023.

At the state level, laws regarding cameras in courtrooms It varies from one country to another And it has changed over the years. Most states allow enrollment in some capacity. However, there are often restrictions, such as requiring the judge’s approval, prohibiting the recording of certain aspects of the trial, or allowing recording only to certain people, such as members of the media.

There are a variety of reasons to ban recording devices in the courtroom. For example, the presence of cameras can be used to intimidate witnesses or jurors, or motivate people to act or speak differently if they know they are on camera. Privacy and security can also be an issue, especially in cases involving minors, who are often allowed to remain anonymous in court records. If worn in court, smart glasses like Meta Glasses could be used to record court proceedings without the judge’s knowledge or permission, potentially putting the privacy of everyone involved in the case at risk.

Dario Maestro, Legal Director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), commented Edge Smart glasses are no exception to the recording ban. “Courts have long restricted recording devices for good reason — to protect witnesses, jurors, and the integrity of the proceedings. No judge would allow someone to sit in the gallery and point their smartphone at the witness stand, even with the camera app closed. Glasses that can secretly record deserve at least the same scrutiny.”

Although the phone can be easily put away, a person who needs corrective lenses may find it difficult to take off smart glasses. If glasses become more popular, the rules may become more difficult to enforce. Meta sold 7 million pairs of smart glasses In 2025, other companies are taking notice, and Apple is said to be aiming for it Release a pair of glasses In 2027.

The glasses usually have an LED indicator that is supposed to show when recording, but it can be off Disabled without permission Even when it is working, it can be easily missed. Meanwhile, features are becoming more invasive: earlier this month, an internal memo from Meta surfaced suggesting that the company is planning to Add facial recognitionallowing users to identify people by name.

Judge Cole explained that she would not allow recording using smart glasses in the courtroom. Outright bans on smart glasses in court are still rare in the United States, so such orders are likely the most direct and commonly used strategy to keep glasses out of court proceedings at the moment.

“Judges typically have a high degree of control over what items and devices are allowed in courtrooms, and I expect most of them will respond as Judge Cole did here with extreme force against any attempts to improperly record proceedings,” Alan Butler, executive director and president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), explained in a statement. Edge.

Butler added: “The fact that Meta’s legal team came to this hearing in a trial regarding the dangers that their gas goggle-equipped systems pose to jurors and others in the courtroom is a bit surprising. But the judge’s response was refreshing and shows that such behavior should not be tolerated.”