A growing number of councils across Victoria are moving to ban smart glasses from public facilities, including swimming pools, childcare centres, playgrounds and recreation centres.
Sixteen of the state's 79 local authorities have confirmed they are actively investigating or implementing measures to prohibit the covert recording devices from community facilities amid privacy concerns from residents.
Frankston City Council, in Melbourne's south-east, resolved to investigate further restrictions to its recreation facilities and childcare centres earlier this month.
Frankston City Council will receive a report into how the conditions of entry can be updated at its community facilities, including the Peninsula Aquatic Centre. (Supplied: Frankston City Council)
"We want people using our facilities to feel safe and comfortable, and to know that their privacy is being taken seriously," Frankston council mayor Sue Baker said.
"It is important that we act early and thoughtfully rather than wait for a problem to occur."
Last month, the City of Yarra became one of the first councils in Australia to implement such measures.
Signs on display at some recreation spaces including the Melbourne City Baths and North Melbourne Community Centre. (Supplied: City of Melbourne)
Signage prohibiting the use of smart glasses has now been installed in public pools and recreation facilities across the City of Melbourne.
Several other councils said their existing conditions of entry for community facilities restrict video and photography which extends to smart glasses.
The Municipal Association of Victoria, the peak body for the state's councils, called for a nationally consistent approach to the management of discreet recording devices and practical guidance for councils on managing inappropriate recording.
A spokesperson for federal Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said the government was continuing to examine ways to appropriately regulate emerging technologies.
Exceptions needed for accessibility
Disability advocates are cautioning councils, however, to ensure exceptions for people with accessibility needs are met.
Heidi Biggin, who has been legally blind for 16 years, said purchasing a pair of smart glasses had changed the way she navigated the world.
Through speakers built into the glasses, artificial intelligence describes her environment, and reads aloud text the built-in camera is pointing at.
"I can go into a restaurant, hold up a menu and say: 'Hey Meta, look and read the menu items to me'," she said.
Heidi Biggin says since purchasing smart glasses, she's unlikely to continue needing to use a guide dog. (Supplied: Heidi Biggin)
However, Mrs Biggin said she regularly encountered members of the public who were upset or frustrated seeing smart glasses worn without understanding how she used them.
"Halfway through a walk, I'll have somebody grab me on the arm and say, 'oi, you've just filmed me'," she said.
"It is exhausting having to explain every time that I'm actually not filming you — I'm using my assistive technology."
Dana McKay from RMIT University's School of Computing Technologies said carve-outs in council policies should be put in place for people with legitimate needs for smart glasses.
"If you need to be wearing the glasses you could use individual change rooms or accessible change rooms," she suggested.
"That should be on an exceptional basis rather than being excepted as a norm."
Associate Professor Dana McKay has also raised concerns about the privacy of data collected by smart glasses. (Supplied: Dana McKay)
When exercising at her local Ballarat gym, Mrs Biggin said she proactively let other gym-goers know if she was wearing her smart glasses.
"Hey, I'm using my Meta Glasses, they're not recording you, they're feeding information back to me and I've only got these modes on," she explained.
Several councils investigating or implementing restrictions on smart glasses as well as the Municipal Association of Victoria told the ABC any necessary exclusions for accessibility requirements would be considered.
Do signs address the problem?
While councils have joined calls for a national approach to to regulate AI-powered smart glasses, behavioural scientists have questioned whether restricting their use in local settings addresses underlying concerns about privacy and harassment.
Australian Catholic University public health expert Stephen Fisher said signs and bans could influence the behaviour of people "already inclined to comply with rules, but they are unlikely to deter men who are deliberately seeking to intimidate, harass or secretly record women".
He said there was a tendency to focus on easy-to-implement intervention measures to address public health concerns which may not address underlying causes.
Dr Stephen Fisher says simple solutions can create an impression that a problem is being managed without addressing the underlying social drivers. (Supplied: Women's Health Goulburn North East)
"The key issue is therefore not smart glasses as such, but what local government can do to prevent harassment, coercion and abuse of women and girls," Dr Fisher said.
"Policies should ultimately be judged by whether they reduce those harms, rather than whether they simply regulate a particular device."
Dr McKay agreed, saying broader questions about the privacy of data collected and future technologies remain unanswered.
"It can't be about legislating the specific technologies," she said.
"What we need to be thinking about is, as a society: where are we comfortable with recording taking place?"
The Victorian Labor government said it was working to understand the practical challenges local authorities are facing to consider the most effective response.
The Liberal-National Coalition said the responsibility for regulating the devices was with the federal government.
The Victorian Greens said it was supportive of consistent regulation for smart glasses which should not be left up to local councils.
One Nation Victoria MP Rikkie-Lee Tyrell said her party believed councils should have the autonomy to make regulations for their respective communities.