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)

    • Libb@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months 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.

      • Lumidaub@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        remove even more of our liberty to use public space (which is supposed to be ours).

        I mean, your freedom to record in public ends where my freedom to not be recorded in public starts.

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

          I mean, your freedom to record in public ends where my freedom to not be recorded in public starts.

          Prior to our wonderful times, and even more so in the UK, public space meant that were no right to privacy to be expected at all while using said public space because, you know, it was public. But the moronic age we live in have managed to change that. So be it.

          So, worry not my dear friend: as a law abiding citizen myself, I dutifully respect your so-called freedom to use what is supposed to a public space as your very own private space, and I 100% gave up on photography the second time I was confronted to the consequences of people considering their freedom implied they were to decide what ‘public’ meant.

          Instead, I switched to sketching the very same people in the very same public space.

          They may be as annoyed by me doing that but good luck forbidding me to sketch in a public space or even proving it was them I specifically I sketched… as, even though I do enjoy it, I suck at sketching ;)

  • foremanguy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Facial recognition street cameras are far more dangerous than these. Sure they are pretty creepy but without rayban you could already insert tiny cameras into glasses to spy on people

  • irotsoma@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months 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.

    • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      “expectation of privacy” is a US-specific legal standard that doesn’t apply on much of the EU. In many countries, you can’t just record someone without their permission or some other permission, regardless of their expectation of privacy.

      • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        what happens if you record say, a tree and someone walks in frame…when what? is it the camera person’s fault, or the one walking.

        • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t know, I’m not that much of a legal expert. My guess would be in most places you’re just supposed to delete it or not use it.