Smart glasses in court are a privacy nightmare. That apparently didn't stop Mark Zuckerberg's team from wearing them.

[highplainsdem]

https://www.theverge.com/tech/882030/smart-glasses-in-court-meta-mark-zuckerberg

When Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrived at a Los Angeles courthouse on Wednesday, he did so with a team that appeared to be wearing Meta’s camera-equipped Ray-Ban smart glasses. Judge Carolyn Kuhl was concerned. According to CNBC, Kuhl warned anyone recording with the glasses, “If you have done that, you must delete that, or you will be held in contempt of the court.” Kuhl also ordered everyone wearing AI smart glasses to remove them. Even after the warning, at least one person was seen wearing the glasses around jurors in a courthouse hallway, although plaintiff attorney Rachel Lanier was told the glasses weren’t recording at the time.

Glasses with recording capabilities have sparked concerns about privacy, surveillance, and doxxing in all kinds of places, and the courtroom is no exception. Earlier this month, a user on the r/legaladvice subreddit shared a post asking for advice on reporting a plaintiff wearing Meta’s glasses to court. Additionally, over recent months, a few states have moved to specifically ban smart glasses from courthouses, including the US District Courts for the District of Hawaii and the Western District of Wisconsin. The Forsyth County Court in North Carolina also banned smart glasses last year. Colorado’s District Court is considering a ban as well.

-snip-

There are a variety of reasons for banning recording devices in the courtroom. For instance, the presence of cameras could potentially be used to intimidate witnesses or jurors, or motivate people to behave or speak differently if they know they are on camera. Privacy and security can also be an issue, especially in cases involving minors, who are often allowed to be anonymous in court records. If worn in court, smart glasses like Meta’s could be used to record court proceedings without a judge’s knowledge or permission, potentially risking the privacy of everyone involved in the case.

-snip-

Butler added, “The fact that Meta’s legal team appears to have come to this hearing in a trial over the dangers their systems cause equipped with invasive glasses that put jurors and others in the courtroom at risk is a bit on the nose. But the Judge’s response was refreshing and shows that such behavior need not be tolerated.”

I don't for one second believe Zuck and his legal team weren't aware recording devices weren't allowed. I believe they hoped to get away with it anyway, and to intimidate people even if the judge caught them and stopped them.

Wearing smart glasses can be a form of bullying/intimidation.

[2naSalit]

1. Meant for...

Jury tampering, no?

[highplainsdem]

2. Seems like it.

I suspect the smart glasses they wore might also have been rigged to record whether or not an indicator light was on, and to send everything recorded to Meta computers and AI models (with facial recognition) immediately.

[2naSalit]

3. Definitely.

They can't play fair on anything.

[cynical_idealist]

4. put them all in faraday cage lockers at front of building

none in court

[mitch96]

5. good idea...nt

[mitch96]

6. "glasses weren't recording at the time." and we have seen and heard time and time again...THEY LIE!!...

Even if they weren't just the fact they are there is jury intimidation...If any are "Doxed" you know they were recording...
m

[misanthrope]

7. American technophilia needs to stop now

I won't deny all the ways modern technology has improved our lives, especially in regards to medical science. That said, the Tech Bros and their ilk have successfully weaponized it and use it for little more than transgression of laws they don't like, amassing repulsive amounts of wealth and trying to establish themselves impervious to the consequences of their actions.

[twodogsbarking]

8. With more guns than humans in the US I am guessing the problem may take care of itself.