The Spectacle of Surveillance: Are Meta Smart Glasses a Threat to Our Right to Privacy in Public? By Adv. CV Manuvilsan
Model: Adv Ajesh K Antony
The Spectacle of Surveillance: Are Meta Smart Glasses a Threat to Our Right to Privacy in Public?
๐️ By Adv. CV Manuvilsan
Sr. Partner, Lex Loci Associates
๐ Welcome to the Era of Invisible Surveillance
The future has officially landed on our faces.With the recent launch of Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses, technology has taken a bold leap: we now wear cameras on our eyes, stream video from our vision, and ask AI for answers while walking through life—hands-free and heads-up.But as we embrace this sleek fusion of fashion and artificial intelligence, a haunting question must be asked:
> Could these stylish glasses slowly dismantle one of our most cherished rights — the right to privacy in public spaces?
๐ A Quick Flashback: What Is the Right to Privacy?
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), a 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court ruled that privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.Contrary to popular belief, privacy is not limited to private places. Even in a public street or marketplace, we retain the reasonable expectation of not being watched, recorded, or tracked without our consent.The Court called this “decisional autonomy” — our right to control what aspects of our life we reveal and to whom.
๐ฏ Enter Meta Smart Glasses
Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses come with:A 12MP hidden camera for video/photos.Open-ear audio and microphones.Voice-activated AI assistant.The power to livestream to Instagram or Facebook — directly from your eyes.
On the surface, it's fun, futuristic, and fashionable.Beneath the surface, it’s surveillance without suspicion.
⚖️ The Legal Problem: Where’s the Consent?
Unlike pulling out a phone to record someone — which is visible, intentional, and challengeable — smart glasses allow you to:
Record strangers silently.
Livestream people in real time without their knowledge.
Capture children, patients, protestors, and women in vulnerable moments — without them ever knowing.
There is no visual cue, no warning beep, no red light.
And therein lies the constitutional danger.
๐จ Red Flags: Why It’s a Threat to Public Privacy
- Unseen Recording = No Informed Consent
- Public spaces don’t mean privacy ends. Without visible indicators, people are stripped of their choice to avoid being recorded.
- Weaponizing Daily Life
- Footage captured through these glasses could be misused for defamation, harassment, voyeurism, or deepfake content — all without accountability
- Chilling Effect on Freedom of Expression
- Imagine knowing that someone around you is possibly recording. Would you protest freely? Speak openly? Hug someone?
- This is how freedom dies — not in courts, but on sidewalks
- Public spaces don’t mean privacy ends. Without visible indicators, people are stripped of their choice to avoid being recorded.
- Footage captured through these glasses could be misused for defamation, harassment, voyeurism, or deepfake content — all without accountability
- Imagine knowing that someone around you is possibly recording. Would you protest freely? Speak openly? Hug someone?
- This is how freedom dies — not in courts, but on sidewalks
4. No Legal Framework to Regulate Use
India has no dedicated law for wearable tech surveillance. The IT Act, IPC, or existing privacy rules aren’t enough to tackle this silent threat.
๐ง⚖️ Fails the Puttaswamy Test
The Supreme Court had laid down the three-part test to judge privacy violations:
Test Meta Glasses
Legality ❌ No statute governing public use of AI glasses.
Necessity ❌ No legitimate purpose behind silent, indiscriminate public recording.
Proportionality ❌ Invasion of mass privacy is not a proportionate use of tech.
The verdict? Unconstitutional by design.
---
๐ What Other Countries Are Doing
France and Germany strictly regulate recording in public without consent.
EU GDPR makes even passive data collection illegal without notice.
U.S. states like Illinois have two-party consent laws for recordings.
India must act — now.
---
๐ก️ What Should Be Done?
✅ Draft Wearable Surveillance Laws
New tech needs new laws — that require visible indicators, restrict use in schools, courts, hospitals, and protect citizens from misuse.
✅ Public Awareness Campaigns
Let people know how they may be watched — even while buying tea or dropping a child to school.
✅ Mandate Tech Transparency
Like CCTVs in public, these devices must notify:
> “You are entering a zone where smart glasses may be in use.”
---
๐ฃ Final Thoughts: Fashion Can’t Override Freedom
We must not let style trump liberty, or convenience overshadow constitutional values.
Meta Smart Glasses, if left unregulated, are a Trojan horse in plain sight — allowing corporate tech and curious strangers to turn our public lives into private data.
We are not just wearing glasses.
> We are wearing eyes that never blink, never forget — and never ask for consent.
---
๐ฌ What’s Your Take?
Do you think Meta Smart Glasses should be regulated?
Have you ever felt uncomfortable being watched in public?
๐ Share your thoughts in the comments.
๐ Share this article with your circle.
❤️ Let’s protect privacy — one lens at a time.
---
✍️ Adv. CV Manuvilsan
Sr. Partner, Lex Loci Associates
[๐ง Contact / ๐ More Articles / ๐ Website Link Placeholder]
Comments
Post a Comment