The CNIL is investigating a first complaint linked to these connected glasses, equipped with a camera. The subject is still far from being settled.
With the increase in sales of connected glasses from Ray-Ban and Meta (parent company of Facebook and Instagram), the French could sometimes feel spied on when passing one of their users in the street. This device allows you to film everything that passes before your eyes, and to broadcast the video live on social networks. With Tech&Co, the CNIL announced that it was investigating a first complaint on this thorny subject.
But in concrete terms, what can users of Meta Ray-Ban glasses, sold for 360 euros, really do? On its site, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram notably highlights a live broadcast function of everything filmed by the glasses on the two social networks.
A Meta Ray-Ban user walking down a French street and wishing to share this moment would therefore risk, in passing, filming dozens of passers-by, who have not yet given the slightest consent for their private lives to be shared with thousands of Internet users. And which could therefore turn against him.
Consent essential (and difficult)
These new practices are not openly regulated by law, whether at the French or European level. And for the moment, in the absence of clear case law, it is difficult to know how the texts surrounding the protection of privacy, but also of personal data, could be applied.
For Éric Barbry, lawyer specializing in new technology law, there is, however, one thing that is obvious: the question of consent. Particularly when a user broadcasts live a video captured by the glasses in the street.
“In theory, we should obtain the consent of each person filmed, even before filming them. Which, in the street, and live, is technically very difficult,” he believes, speaking to Tech&Co.
Before mentioning another even more thorny case: the live broadcast of images in a private setting – for example in the waiting room of a medical office, which, without the consent of all the people filmed, falls under the criminal.
“In the absence of an explicit legal provision, the function of the Meta glasses is not prohibited in principle. But this does not mean that the distribution is not subject to conditions, there may be restrictions”, analysis for his part Alexandre Archambault, lawyer specializing in digital law, with Tech&Co.
Domestic use
If the live streaming function of the Meta Ray-Ban is problematic, the connected glasses also allow you to record simple videos, as a smartphone could do. A more classic use, which could be similar to that of a simple smartphone.
In a document summarizing the “guidelines on the processing of personal data by video devices”, published in 2020, the European Data Protection Committee (EDPS, equivalent of the CNIL at the European level), recalls that the GDPR , regulation on personal data, does not apply to domestic uses.
Culture AI: Meta puts AI in its glasses – 04/24
For example, a tourist who records “videos on both his cell phone and a camcorder to document his vacation” and who shows “the images to his friends and family” but without making them “accessible to an indeterminate number of people”, explains the EDPS.
With such an interpretation, the use of Meta Ray-Bans to film third parties, without the videos subsequently being widely distributed, could be legal. Provided that this recording is not followed by wide distribution – live or delayed, for example on an Instagram account open to all.
What responsibility for Meta?
In the absence of a legal framework, case law, or even recommendations from the CNIL, Meta plays it safe, logically placing the responsibility for its product on its customers. On son sitethe company has published “some advice for you and your loved ones to use your glasses with complete peace of mind”.
“Stop recording if a person prefers not to be filmed” recommends Meta in particular.
A wording which actually implies that its glasses will be very difficult to use to film a visit to a city live.
Well aware of the criminal risks linked to filming a private place without consent, Meta also recommends avoiding using the camera on your glasses “in sensitive places, for example in a medical office, changing rooms, public toilets , a school or a place of worship”.
Meta also returns to the LED light, which lights up when the glasses' camera is in operation. The company specifies that it is the user's responsibility to explain to the people filmed the meaning of this LED light. Which would mean, for example, specifying how this works for each person we meet in the street.
“The indicator light is a joke, as long as it is not known to everyone,” judges Eric Barbry, who wonders if Meta’s responsibility cannot be called into question.
“When you sell a tool knowing that it is massively used illicitly, the question arises,” he believes.
If this question had also arisen a decade ago with Google Glass, finally abandoned, the regulator and public authorities risk having to address it more head-on: in September 2024, the Essilorluxottica group (owner of the Ray- Ban) announced a new “long-term” agreement with Meta “to develop several generations of smart glasses”.