Smart glasses allow the wearer to record video, photo, and audio hands-free with little more than an LED to show it’s happening.
Small wonder, then, that the technology is at the centre of a privacy debate around Australia.
Despite public calls for an outright ban, the federal government isn’t currently planning one. Instead, the technology has prompted some state-level and council-level restrictions, retail space bans, and a probe into Privacy Act reform.
Why smart glasses are controversial
High-end smart glasses like Meta Ray-Ban models cost around $500 and up, but the tech has been trickling down in cost. Kmart’s Anko version now sells for $89, and sold out rapidly.
The eSafety Commissioner has flagged behaviour by “pick-up artists” using the glasses to film women without their knowledge and post the footage online. This kind of behaviour has led to the online slang “pervert glasses”.
“The harms linked to covert recording are not hypothetical,” says the commissioner’s report, which points to image-based abuse, cyberbullying, and non-consensual livestreaming as current risks.
What authorities are doing already
Brisbane City Council was one of the first local authorities to deliver policy on the glasses, banning non-consensual filming with any camera device, including smart glasses, at its 21 public pools from August.
Other councils have introduced similar restrictions at their own facilities, and Attorney-General Michelle Rowland has encouraged even more councils around Australia to look at where similar policies can be implemented.
Melbourne’s Yarra Council, the City of Sydney, and Canterbury-Bankstown have introduced bans at local pools and leisure centres.
What the government proposes
Rowland has written to the Privacy Commissioner asking for smart glasses to be treated as a priority. At the same time, she has released draft reforms to the Privacy Act open for consultation.
The reforms themselves would introduce a “fair and reasonable” test on data collection, a right to erasure from large digital platforms, tightened consent standards, and limits on trading personal information without permission.
Separately, Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has asked the Australian Public Service Commission whether smart glasses should be prohibited in public sector workplaces altogether.
Greens propose stronger restrictions
The Greens are pushing a 12-month import ban on camera-enabled wearables like Meta and Anko glasses, with an exemption for disability aids.
“These covert wearables are a disturbing technology,” said Greens leader David Shoebridge, who also noted that the party’s bill would make filming, storing, and sharing smart glasses footage without consent a breach of the Privacy Act.
The Greens cite a Monash University study on undisclosed recording and their own polling, which shows that roughly a third of Australians want the devices banned altogether.
The legal gap smart glasses exploit
Currently, Australia’s Privacy Act merely regulates businesses and government agencies, not individuals. A person filming someone else with smart glasses isn’t currently covered by the Act.
State law fills the gap in some cases. In Queensland, for example, recording someone without consent in a location where a reasonable adult would expect privacy is a criminal offence.
Outside Queensland, a statutory tort applies for civil cases, allowing anyone to sue over serious invasions of privacy.
Smart glasses’ privacy reform
Public consultation on the reforms ended in the middle of September, and the government is expected to introduce legislation before the end of the year. eSafety has recommended measures like default face blurring without consent, delayed livestreaming, visible recording indicators, and automatic shutoff.
Unfortunately, every recommendation on the list is voluntary for now. Manufacturers have no commercial incentive to limit the main feature these devices are sold for, and until that changes, smart glasses will continue to sell faster than the law can keep up.
Stay in touch with the latest news, guides, and reviews by subscribing to our newsletter.
3 comments
Nigel Fletcher
Whilst I agree about the concerns around these glasses would be nice to balance the reporting with how they are making a massive difference to the blind.
Janice Campbell
I’m blind. These mets glasses describe the around Me. This makes it safer for me. They also help with reading text or signs for example. This technology has opened up my world. Has anyone talked or thought about how banning them will be such a big loss to blind people. They help me find things in the pantry. They read labels on food assisting identification of similar packaged food. These are just a few examples of the benefits. They open the curtain allowing many of us a new view of the world
Scott Hunt
Hey Janice, they definitely have their uses. Proposed bans like the Greens’ one have exemptions for disability aids as mentioned in the article.