Companies that make smart glasses or provide the apps and AI services linked to them “should not rely on the users’ actions to meet their own GDPR obligations,” the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) said in a statement adopted on October 13. The EDPB, which brings together the EU’s data protection regulators, said manufacturers must design glasses so bystanders can tell when they are recording, with signals that are “impossible or difficult to disable.”
The statement is non-binding but guides how EU regulators assess compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In India, where Meta has sold Ray-Ban glasses since May 2025, people filmed by wearers have turned to legal notices and police complaints, with no regulatory guidance on who is responsible.
What does the EDPB expect from makers?
The EDPB said current indicators on smart glasses “leave many non-users unaware that their data is being processed.” It asked makers to combine several signals, enabled by default:
- LED lights: Visible in all lighting conditions and active long enough for people to notice. The glasses should stop recording when someone covers the light. People can mistake a white LED for a reflection, the EDPB noted.
- Audio cues: Shutter sounds or voice commands that wearers must speak aloud to start recording.
- Phone alerts: Bluetooth signals that notify nearby phones when the glasses are recording, though these should not be the only signal.
- Design: Visual cues that help people distinguish smart glasses from regular glasses.
It also recommended blurring bystanders’ faces on the device, switching off storage by default for real-time assistant features, blocking recording in sensitive places through geofencing, and adding “privacy frictions” that slow down sharing on social media. The EDPB called for industry-wide standards on recording signals.
Using smart glasses with facial or voice recognition “raises unprecedented questions regarding societal choices and poses a high risk to the rights and freedoms in public spaces,” the EDPB said. Some glasses also have microphones that can record conversations in which the wearer is not participating. Even when people recognise the glasses, they may change their behaviour and “suppress spontaneity” for fear that someone is recording them, it added.
Can companies use bystanders’ footage to train AI?
The EDPB said this would be “particularly difficult to demonstrate” as a legitimate interest because bystanders would not expect it, especially if they did not know they had been recorded. Makers and AI providers also cannot obtain valid consent from bystanders with whom they have no relationship, and consent obtained by a company after recording does not count, it said.
When an AI assistant analyses camera footage in which other people appear, the company providing the assistant is responsible for that data under the GDPR.
When are wearers responsible?
Recording family members or friends privately falls under the GDPR’s household exemption, which the EDPB said regulators must interpret narrowly. Wearers become responsible under the GDPR if they share footage on a public social media account or use the glasses for official, professional or political work. “A user should not justify their continuous or indiscriminate recording of other individuals solely by a general or hypothetical concern for their personal safety,” the EDPB said.
The EDPB flagged greater risks in hospitals, schools, changing rooms, swimming pools and workplaces, as well as for children. A report published alongside the statement found that people use smart glasses for interpersonal surveillance and to gather evidence against others, creating power imbalances between wearers and those they record.
How have people used Ray-Ban Meta glasses in India?
- Khan Market: A creator covertly recorded a man at a café on July 24 and posted the reel, which crossed 4 lakh views. The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) sent Meta and the creator a legal notice on his behalf on August 24, seeking Rs 2.05 crore and arguing that Meta is liable as the glasses’ manufacturer. Meta’s Grievance Officer for India did not acknowledge his complaint.
- Street harassment: On June 11, a man stopped a woman on a dimly lit street, pressed her for her Instagram handle and recorded the encounter. The reel reached about 23 lakh views. IFF sent Meta a second notice on September 10.
- Trans rights protest: A content creator recorded a transfeminine artist at a protest in Delhi on March 29, and the clip spread as a meme.
- Police use: Delhi Police used Meta glasses to record demonstrators at a protest in June, as we reported. An Indian Express Hindi team spotted an officer wearing Ray-Ban Meta glasses during the October 10 protests against the Chief Election Commissioner. The officer said he was not recording.
Meta announced in July that its glasses would stop recording if someone covered the capture LED. Sellers still list LED-blocking stickers for the glasses on Amazon India, with one seller marketing a set for “discreet recording in business meetings.”
India’s Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, does not apply to personal data that an individual processes for personal or domestic purposes, and it does not require wearers to tell anyone they are recording. No Indian court has decided whether a smart glasses manufacturer is liable when its device records a bystander.
What have other governments done?
Norway’s government said on October 5 that it would ask parliament for a temporary ban on AI glasses in selected public places, including parks, beaches, museums, schools, healthcare facilities and gyms, while an expert group drafts permanent rules, AP reported. The government has not yet submitted the bill. Oslo has already banned camera glasses in schools, and Hamburg has proposed banning smart glasses on public transport and in swimming pools.
Dutch optical chain Hans Anders has stopped selling Ray-Ban Meta glasses in the Netherlands and Belgium, and Dutch consumer group Consumentenbond sent Meta a summons letter on September 29. A UK petition calling for an end to their sale has crossed 10,000 signatures, requiring the government to respond.
In the US, California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill in late September that would have penalised recording people with smart glasses in places such as changing rooms and doctors’ offices. He said its definition of a wearable recording device was too broad. The EDPB said further guidance on smart glasses may follow.
Also read:
- Meta ditches the camera for new Ray-Ban Audio glasses, but privacy questions remain
- Meta’s AI Glasses Go Live in India, But What About Privacy for Others?
The post Smart glasses makers can’t shift privacy duties to users, says EU regulator. But who is responsible in India? appeared first on MEDIANAMA.