Meta sued over AI smart glasses privacy concerns, after workers review nudity, sex and other images | TechCrunch

Meta faces new lawsuit over its AI smart glasses and their lack of privacy, after an investigation by Swedish newspapers revealed that workers at a Kenya-based contractor were reviewing images of customers’ glasses, which included sensitive content, such as nudity, people having sex and using the toilet.

Meta claimed that faces were blurred in the images, but sources disputed that this blurring worked consistently. reports noted. The news prompted the UK regulator, the Information Commissioner’s Office, to investigate the matter.

Now the tech giant is also facing a lawsuit in the United States. In the new folder complaintplaintiffs Gina Bartone of New Jersey and Mateo Canu of California, represented by the public interest law firm Clarkson, allege that Meta violated privacy laws and engaged in false advertising.

The complaint alleges that Meta AI smart glasses are advertised using promises such as “designed for privacy, controlled by you” and “designed for your privacy,” which might not lead customers to assume that images from their glasses, including intimate moments, were being viewed by foreign workers. The plaintiffs believed Meta’s marketing and said they saw no disclaimers or information contradicting the advertised privacy protections.

The suit accuses Meta and its eyewear manufacturing partner Luxottica of America of conduct that violates consumer protection laws.

Clarkson Law Firm, which over the years has filed other major lawsuits against tech giants, including Apple, GoogleAnd OpenAIunderlines the scale of the problems that arise. By 2025, more than seven million people have purchased Meta’s smart glasses. Images from these glasses are fed into a data pipeline for review, and users cannot opt ​​out.

Meta told the BBC that when people share content with Meta AI, it uses contractors to review the information to improve people’s experience with the glasses, which is explained in its privacy policy, and highlighted its Additional Meta-Platform Terms of Usewithout specifying where this was noted. The media outlet noted, however, that a mention of a human review could be found in Meta UK Terms of Service for AI.

A version of this policy which applies to the United States, states: “In some cases, Meta will review your interactions with AIs, including the content of your conversations or messages to AIs, and this review may be automated or manual (human). »

The complaint primarily highlights how the glasses were marketed, showing examples of advertisements touting privacy benefits, describing their privacy settings and “an added layer of security.”

“You control your data and your content,” one ad read, explaining that smart glasses owners had to choose what content was shared with others.

The rise of smart glasses and other “luxury surveillance” technologies, such as always-listening AI pendants, has sparked a broad backlash. A developer published an application able to detect when smart glasses are nearby.

Meta had no comment on the litigation itself as of Thursday morning. However, spokesperson Christopher Sgro provided the following statement about the overall issue: “Ray-Ban Meta glasses help you use AI, hands-free, to answer questions about the world around you. Unless users choose to share media they’ve captured with Meta or others, that media stays on the user’s device. When people share content with Meta AI, we sometimes use contractors to review that data for the purpose to improve people’s experience, as many other companies do. We take steps to filter this data to protect people’s privacy and to help prevent scrutiny of identifying information.

Updated after publication with Meta’s statement.

View biography