Danish watchdog warns AI glasses could democratise surveillance

AI-enabled smart glasses raise “an extremely large number” of data protection concerns and could make surveillance in public spaces accessible to anyone, Allan Frank, an IT security specialist and lawyer at Denmark’s Data Protection Agency, told DR.

The Norwegian data protection authority has called for sales of the glasses to be stopped in Norway. Several brands produce AI glasses, but Meta’s latest version, sold in frames including Ray-Ban and Oakley, has attracted particular attention.

Smart glasses have become increasingly difficult to distinguish from ordinary spectacles. In addition to recording video, they contain artificial intelligence technology. They are sold in large numbers and have been praised as a tool to help blind and visually impaired people navigate everyday life.

But the glasses have also been criticised because they could be misused to record and share videos of women in particular without their consent.

It is the use of the glasses that creates the legal problem

Criticism has also intensified in Denmark. An advertising campaign for Meta’s smart glasses in Euroman and Eurowoman was stopped after strong opposition in the comments. Influencers and the optician chain Synoptik were also criticised for advertising the product. Influencers Sus Wilkens and Cecilie Haugaard have since deleted their promotional posts on Instagram.

International media have recently reported on misuse of the glasses. In Germany, HateAid, an organisation that works to protect people from online hate speech, filed a police complaint this week against Meta, several eyewear brands and opticians selling the glasses.

In Norway, Line Coll, director of the country’s equivalent of the Data Protection Agency, called on parliament two weeks ago to stop sales of smart glasses. She said the risk of users being caught was very small, particularly when people wore dark sunglasses. Parents on a beach might not notice their children being filmed, she said, adding that malicious recording would be difficult to detect.

According to Frank, however, it is the use of the glasses, rather than the product itself, that can violate data protection law. Recording at home does not create a problem, he said, but recording in public can.

“If this type of opportunity for hidden surveillance becomes widespread, users risk breaking the rules of the GDPR,” Frank said.

Identifiable people in video recordings are considered personal data. Among other things, it is illegal to share videos online without people’s consent. Recording on private property is not lawful, while the video surveillance law also prohibits private individuals from carrying out “continuous or regularly repeated” surveillance of streets and public places.

“If you regularly record ordinary people on the street, you are participating in a form of surveillance,” Frank said.

The same principle applies to videos taken with mobile phones. The difference is that recordings made with glasses may be hidden from the people being filmed. The glasses have a small light that flashes on the side during recording, but some people say it is easy to overlook.

Concerns over Meta’s handling of data

Frank compared the issue with certain cars that also record video and may be close to violating the video surveillance law.

The European Data Protection Board is finalising a report on smart glasses. Expected before the end of the summer, it will examine privacy risks and possible joint measures across the European Union.

Frank also expressed concern about how Meta and other companies process data from the glasses, including whether their artificial intelligence could be used for facial recognition.

“There may be various issues concerning how Meta processes the information. What happens to the video when it is handed over to Meta?” Frank said.