Meta's latest smart glasses, the Oakley Vanguard AI model, have sparked growing privacy concerns, with UK venues like Wetherspoons and ATG banning them. Despite this, regulators have been slow to respond, leaving businesses to take the lead in protecting customers from invasive surveillance.
Rising Criticism and Bans
The glasses, dubbed "pervert glasses" by some, have been criticized for their potential misuse. In the UK, pub chain Wetherspoons, theatre group ATG, along with restaurants, schools, and members' clubs, have prohibited their use. These organizations have been praised for prioritizing privacy, while regulators appear to be lagging behind.
Reports of women being filmed without consent have surfaced, with footage uploaded to social media. In one case, a content creator demanded a fee to remove the video. Between March 2024 and March 2025, image-based sexual abuse and cyberflashing accounted for over half of an 11% rise in reported sexual offences in England and Wales, highlighting the potential for smart glasses to exacerbate such crimes.
Privacy Beyond Sexual Abuse
Privacy concerns extend beyond sexual misconduct. Most people do not want to be filmed in their daily lives, as recognized by businesses banning the glasses. While filming in public is not illegal, it does not grant wearers the right to subject others to involuntary surveillance. An LED light indicating camera use is insufficient, as it can be easily overlooked or disabled.
Meta has invested $80bn in these glasses, aiming to make them as common as smartphones. Unlike Google's failed early smart glasses, Meta's version is more stylish, functional, and affordable, with UK prices starting at £269. The company's choice of Kylie Jenner for its summer campaign, with the slogan "Never miss a moment," appears designed to counter fears about predatory use.
Potential Benefits and Harms
Smart glasses offer significant benefits, particularly for blind or visually impaired users, as they can read text and describe images. Such uses should be protected, similar to exemptions for guide dogs. However, these benefits must not overshadow the potential for harm.
Tech regulation is challenging, but given the UK government's recent actions on smartphone use among young people and public concern over sexualized AI imagery, the lack of ministerial response to wearable cameras is disappointing. The lesson from the past two decades is that users are rarely in control as much as they think. Ministers and regulators must be proactive, not reactive, as Meta blurs the line between looking and filming.
