Governments, courts and companies are placing executive bans on Meta’s AI glasses while others are considering restrictions and examining existing rules on smart glasses amid worries that the technology, brought to mainstream by Meta’s (META.O), opens new tab Ray-Bans, could be used to photograph, film or audio-record confidential materials or people without their knowledge.
Here is a summary of what countries and regions are doing to protect people’s privacy, in alphabetical order.
AUSTRALIA
The federal government said in September it was considering barring the use of camera-equipped smart glasses in government workplaces due to privacy and security concerns.
Public Service Minister Katy Gallagher asked the country’s Public Service Commission for advice on whether their use should be prohibited and what exemptions might be required.
BRITAIN
Courts in England and Wales have prohibited the use of Meta smart glasses because of restrictions on taking images and videos in courts.
British cinema operators are also introducing policies to prohibit or restrict camera-enabled smart glasses, the UK Cinema Association said in August.
EUROPEAN UNION
Smart glasses have attracted scrutiny from European privacy regulators and some lawmakers, and the European Data Protection Board has commissioned a report into their “social acceptability”.
Member of the European Parliament Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová also urged the European Commission, which has not proposed legislation specifically targeting smart glasses, to consider possible action.
NORWAY
The government said it planned to propose a temporary ban on the use of AI glasses in places where the public regularly gather, such as parks, beaches, museums, shopping centres and public events.
Norway’s capital Oslo earlier banned smart glasses in schools in August.
UNITED STATES
New York’s Unified Court System banned smart glasses from all its court facilities from July 20. The rule covers prescription and non-prescription eyewear or headwear containing cameras, microphones, computers or other technology capable of recording video or audio. Visitors carrying them must hand them over to court personnel for safekeeping before entering.
Features of Meta’s AI Glasses and Pricing
Meta’s AI glasses (primarily the Ray-Ban Meta line, plus Meta’s own branded models) are stylish smart glasses that integrate Meta AI for hands-free interaction, media capture, and everyday assistance.
Key Features Incldue:
- Camera & capture: 12 MP ultra-wide camera for photos and video up to 3K Ultra HD on recent generations, with modes like hyperlapse, slow motion, and autocapture. An LED indicator shows when recording is active.
- Open-ear audio: Speakers in the temples deliver music, podcasts, calls, and AI responses while keeping you aware of surroundings. Newer models use a 5- or 6-mic array with strong noise reduction.
- Meta AI: Voice-activated assistant (“Hey Meta”) for questions, live translation, visual understanding of what you see, photo editing, and more. Customizable action button for quick access.
- Battery: Typically 8–9 hours with up to 12 hours on camera-free Audio models, plus extra charge from the included case (often 40–50 additional hours).
- Other: Bluetooth/Wi-Fi connectivity, prescription and Transitions lens options, water resistance (IPX4), and compatibility with apps like Instagram, WhatsApp, Spotify, and Be My Eyes. Camera-free Ray-Ban Meta Audio models focus purely on audio + AI for lighter weight and privacy.
Pricing and Availability
Prices and availability vary by region, lens type, and retailer
- Meta-branded glasses (e.g., Adventurer, Fury): from ~$249–$299
- Ray-Ban Meta Audio (no camera): from ~$349–$379
- Ray-Ban Meta (Gen 2/Gen 3, camera + audio): from ~$379–$449
- Meta Ray-Ban Display (with in-lens display): from $799
- Prescription lenses and special editions add extra cost.
Negative sides of AI glasses
Meta’s Ray-Ban Meta and similar models include several practical, social, and ethical drawbacks such as:
Privacy and surveillance risks
The built-in cameras and microphones make it easy to record people without their knowledge or consent. The small LED indicator is often hard to notice (or can be disabled/tampered with), leading to widespread concerns about covert filming, harassment (especially of women), and bystander data being captured. Footage has sometimes been reviewed by human contractors for AI training, including sensitive or intimate content, sparking lawsuits and regulatory scrutiny.
Social awkwardness and stigma
Wearers are frequently viewed with suspicion—nicknamed “pervert glasses” or “creepy glasses” in public discourse. Many people feel uncomfortable around them, and some venues (pubs, theatres, courts, schools) have banned them. This can make social interactions strained and has led some owners to stop wearing them in public.
Technical and practical limitations
Battery life is limited (typically 8–12 hours depending on use), image quality in low light is often mediocre compared to phones, and AI responses can be unreliable or limited. The devices also require a companion app that can consume significant phone storage and permissions.
Data and security concerns
Heavy reliance on Meta’s ecosystem means personal audio, video, and interaction data may be used for AI training (with limited opt-out options in some cases). There are ongoing worries about facial recognition features, doxxing potential, and the broader normalization of always-on wearable surveillance.
In short, while convenient for hands-free capture and AI assistance, AI glasses raise significant privacy, social trust, and usability challenges that remain unresolved.
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/countries-weigh-banning-smart-glasses-over-privacy-concerns-2026-10-06/
