Countries Move to Restrict Smart Glasses as Privacy Fears Grow

Smart glasses are increasingly coming under scrutiny around the world as governments, courts and businesses grapple with the privacy risks posed by wearable devices capable of recording photographs, video and audio.

The technology has been gaining popularity, particularly through Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses, which combine conventional eyewear with cameras, microphones, artificial intelligence and other connected features. But the same technology that allows users to capture moments hands-free is raising a difficult question: what happens when the person being recorded does not know they are on camera?

Several countries and institutions are now considering restrictions, while others have already prohibited smart glasses in sensitive locations. The growing response suggests that governments are beginning to treat camera-equipped eyewear not simply as another consumer gadget, but as a potential surveillance tool.

Norway considers temporary ban on smart glasses

Norway has emerged as one of the strongest voices in the growing debate. The government plans to propose a temporary ban on the use of AI-equipped smart glasses in a range of public places where people would normally expect a reasonable level of privacy.

The proposed restrictions could cover parks, beaches, museums, shopping centres and public events. Oslo has already banned smart glasses in schools, while other Norwegian organisations have introduced their own restrictions.

Norwegian authorities have stressed that the proposal is not intended to amount to a total ban on the technology. Instead, the government wants to give itself time to examine how wearable AI devices should be regulated and to develop permanent rules that balance technological innovation with people’s right to privacy.

The concern is particularly strong around children and locations such as schools, playgrounds, healthcare facilities, gyms and changing rooms, where covert recording could have serious consequences.

Australia examines restrictions

Australia is also reviewing how smart glasses should be used, particularly inside government workplaces. The federal government said in September that it was considering restricting camera-equipped smart glasses in government offices because of privacy and security concerns.

The country’s privacy authorities have since intensified their scrutiny of the technology. Australia’s privacy commissioner announced an investigation into the Chinese software company behind the HeyCyan application used by a cheaper brand of smart glasses sold by Kmart, following concerns about covert recording and the handling of personal information.

The Australian debate has also spread beyond government offices. Several local councils have moved to restrict smart glasses in sensitive public locations, including swimming pools, playgrounds and gyms. A petition calling for restrictions has reportedly attracted more than 55,000 signatures.

Britain targets courts and cinemas

In Britain, restrictions have already emerged in places where recording could create particular problems. Courts in England and Wales prohibit the use of Meta smart glasses because of existing rules governing photography and video recording inside court facilities.

The cinema industry is also taking precautions. The UK Cinema Association has said operators are introducing policies to prohibit or restrict camera-enabled smart glasses because of concerns that they could be used to record films without permission.

The issue is therefore no longer limited to personal privacy. Businesses and institutions are also worried about intellectual property, confidential information and security.

European regulators investigate the wider problem

The European Union has not introduced a specific bloc-wide ban on smart glasses, but European privacy regulators are examining the technology more closely.

The European Data Protection Board has commissioned a report examining the social acceptability of smart glasses, while lawmakers have called for the European Commission to consider whether additional action may be necessary.

The concern is partly linked to the fact that smart glasses can look almost identical to ordinary eyewear. Although some devices have an external light intended to show when the camera is recording, critics argue that bystanders may not always notice it or understand what it means.

That creates a fundamentally different privacy problem from the traditional smartphone. A person holding up a phone to take a photograph is usually obvious to those nearby. Someone wearing ordinary-looking glasses may be able to capture images from their natural field of view without attracting the same attention.

The Netherlands sees a growing backlash

The debate has also intensified in the Netherlands, where major retailers have paused sales of Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses amid growing privacy concerns.

Dutch privacy authorities have warned that recordings showing identifiable people cannot necessarily be published or shared without their permission, even when the recording takes place in a public environment.

Consumer organisations and privacy campaigners have gone further, arguing that the glasses should not remain widely available until manufacturers can prevent covert recording more effectively.

Meta has defended its technology, pointing to a visible light that flashes when photographs or video are being recorded. The company says the recording system is also designed to stop working when someone attempts to cover or tamper with the indicator.

New York courts impose a ban

The United States is also moving toward tighter controls in sensitive environments. New York’s Unified Court System banned smart glasses from its court facilities from July 20.

The prohibition covers both prescription and non-prescription eyewear containing cameras, microphones, computers or other technology capable of recording audio or video. Visitors carrying such devices can be required to surrender them to court personnel before entering.

The measure reflects a broader concern that technology capable of recording continuously or discreetly could compromise court proceedings, confidential information or the privacy of people involved in legal cases.

Why smart glasses are causing a new privacy debate

At the centre of the controversy is not simply the existence of cameras. Smartphones have had powerful cameras for years, and people have become accustomed to being photographed or recorded in public.

The difference with smart glasses is the way the camera is integrated into ordinary-looking eyewear. The wearer does not need to raise a device, point it directly at another person or visibly interact with a screen. That makes recording more discreet and potentially much harder for the person being recorded to detect.

The addition of artificial intelligence makes the issue even more complicated. Future generations of smart glasses are expected to become increasingly capable of understanding what their cameras see, listening to conversations and responding to their users in real time.

That could turn the glasses from simple recording devices into wearable AI assistants that constantly interact with the user’s surroundings. Governments are therefore facing pressure to establish rules before the technology becomes too widespread to regulate effectively.

A challenge for the future of wearable technology

The debate does not necessarily mean smart glasses are destined to disappear. Technology companies see wearable devices as one of the most important potential successors to the smartphone, with AI allowing people to access information through natural conversation rather than constantly looking down at a screen.

The challenge will be determining where legitimate use ends and unacceptable surveillance begins. Smart glasses could have useful applications in accessibility, navigation, communication, education and other areas, but those benefits do not eliminate the rights of people who happen to be within the camera’s field of view.

For now, governments appear to be moving toward targeted restrictions rather than outright bans. The emerging approach is to limit the devices in places where privacy, security or confidentiality is particularly important while allowing responsible use elsewhere.

But as smart glasses become more sophisticated and less distinguishable from ordinary eyewear, the privacy debate is likely to become even more intense. What began as a question about a new consumer gadget is quickly becoming a much larger debate about whether people should be able to move through public spaces without knowing that an invisible digital record of t