More and more, i see people wearing these ‘smart’ glasses as sunglasses which i find totally creepy and intrusive. Living in the EU, i am wondering how these glasses are even ‘allowed’ in public or may even be sold here. It becomes harder to avoid cause they become so hard to identify. How to deal with this? To what extend is this allowed? (cause apparently it is some way)

  • utopiah@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Most answers here are opinions which are perfectly valid, even important, but also irrelevant regarding the actual law.

    I’m not a regulator or a lawyer so instead of providing another opinion or false information I recommend checking dedicated structures, e.g. AccessNow https://www.accessnow.org/tag/augmented-reality/ or EFF https://www.eff.org/issues/xr while being mindful both of those are from the US and thus if you are not looking for EU specific article, they are basically irrelevant too. You can also check legal research e.g. https://edpl.lexxion.eu/article/EDPL/2024/2/8 which would be useful to get a better understanding of the current legal situation regardless of suggestions.

    FWIW this is me speaking for 3min at he European Commission just few weeks ago https://video.benetou.fr/w/65FQnvrncexbJ1jFNKkMrV on providing and using an open stack for smart glasses, more broadly XR, but again this is JUST my perspective, not the actual law. Overall my rule of thumb is now legal situation comes from nothing, so relying on what has existed before, e.g. seeing smart glasses recording as wearable smartphones is at least a starting point.

    • Libb@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Using a camera on public property in the EU is broadly very legal.

      Less and less so; at least here in France and in Germany and also in the UK, which was quite surprising to me. In the EU, the GDRP being another nail in the coffin of the right of photographing on public space and photographing random people in that public space. Most of the cases I’ve heard of in the last few years ended up with the plaintiff winning against the photographer, even if the picture was not exploited professionally.

      Smart glasses will raise a new flag and push all rules to the next level of paranoia (rightfully so, I’m afraid) and will then be used as an excuse to remove even more of our liberty to use public space (which is supposed to be ours).

      Edit: clarifications.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t think it’s a big deal most of the time if in public. And private places are always allowed to ban cameras. If you ban smart glasses because of the camera, then you have to ban phones and that was tried and failed in most places. And banning cameras in public or requiring a license to carry one would be a huge hit to freedom overall. All of those things were already tried when portable cameras and then cell phones with cameras were new if you want to research why.

    The idea is to allow social pressures to deal with these things. And most of the imagined problems never actually pop up. Like there wasn’t much of a significant increase in illicit photography in changing rooms when cell phones were allowed. The only difference here is that the smart glasses may end up being difficult to differentiate from ordinary glasses eventually. But companies like putting their brands on things, so that may not end up being an issue.

    And there have been illicit versions of these things for ages and that isn’t going to go away just because it’s illegal to wear it. It’s already illegal to do a lot of the things people are using them for that you’re likely worried about. Having an additional law for possession is not going to change that very much and definitely won’t balance out the harm caused by disallowing all cameras in public.

    • iamtherealwalrus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      If you ban smart glasses because of the camera, then you have to ban phones and that was tried and failed in most places.

      A few years ago, some venues here in Copenhagen, Denmark started banning phones, i.e. you would have to place your phone into a small, locked bag for the duration of the show and then when you left the venue, you could unlock the bag and use your phone again. I think that was perfectly allowed.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        There are many places that have those rules as I mentioned. For private property, it’s not uncommon, but mostly only in secure locations that you buy tickets or otherwise pay or that have other restrictions to enter. Especially artistic venues where artists don’t want their works recorded. This is mostly for protecting financial interests over privacy, though. It’s not common for stores, gyms, and other locations that are open to the public, even if on private property, where taking photos isn’t a financial concern of the location. That’s pretty rare because it was too difficult to convince people to leave behind their phones or trust a worker to keep track of who’s phone is whose, so it kept people from coming to those places. Instead people often voluntarily keep their phones secure in lockers or keep them in their pockets or otherwise don’t take them out in plain view due to social pressure for privacy, especially in public showers, bathrooms, and changing rooms which were the places some politicians insisted it would end up being a major issue without laws.