US Senators Ron Wyden and Edward Markey sent Mark Zuckerberg a rather scathing letter about Meta’s camera glasses. They accused the company of launching a product “tailored to invade the privacy of its users and viewers.” And looking at the incidents they cite, it’s not hard to understand why. Meta has until November 25 to respond.
Meta knew about the risks before launching his glasses
According to the senators, Meta’s own human rights assessment identified risks to women, children and other vulnerable people in 2021, before its first Ray-Ban glasses went on sale. The company went ahead anyway. The examples in their press release are disturbing. In 2025, 404 media outlets reported on men secretly filming women while requesting sexual services, with the recordings eventually reaching millions of views on social media.
The letter also cites reports of overseas contractors reviewing intimate footage, including people undressing and having sex. More than 70 plaintiffs sued Meta, alleging that sensitive recordings were shared without consent. The senators describe “exposing intimate moments of unsuspecting individuals to strangers for AI training” as an invasion of privacy. Meta’s commitment to prevent misuse of intimate images, they add, “takes rings” without meaningful safeguards.
They want answers about who gets access to recordings, how they are used for AI training, whether the lights of the recording can be bypassed and how people can get their data deleted. Markey had already questioned Meta’s reported facial recognition plans in March.
The world is growing uncomfortable with camera glasses
Norway is preparing restrictions on AI glasses in public spaces, while Oslo has already banned them in schools. Courts in England, Wales, and New York have also imposed restrictions. Australia is considering a ban on government jobs. California tried to introduce penalties for surreptitiously recording people in private spaces, but Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill over its broad definition of wearable devices.
Meta has introduced security measures that disable recording when the camera’s warning light is obscured. A welcome improvement, yes. But I still struggle to see how a little flashing light protects someone when their private footage has already been recorded and potentially shared with strangers.
RELATED COVERAGE: