Meta glasses captured and shared intimate images without users’ consent, lawsuit claims

As Meta prepares to release new wearables, privacy fears surrounding its artificial intelligence glasses have triggered fresh lawsuits against the social media giant.

More than 70 people who bought, used or were recorded with Meta’s smart glasses have sued the social media giant, claiming their intimate and sensitive images were exposed to workers abroad who are paid to review and label photos and videos.

The contractors in Kenya work for companies that help train Meta’s artificial intelligence, according to a proposed class-action lawsuit amended in late August.

The smart glasses users, some in California, allege the gadget captured footage of themselves and family members undressing, going to the bathroom, having sex and entering passwords. In some cases, the people said they weren’t aware the camera-equipped glasses were recording.

One California user, referred to as PL18 in the lawsuit, alleges his glasses were unknowingly recording after he placed the smart glasses on the bathroom counter.

“He noticed that at times photos of his family members using the bathroom and bathing began appearing in his gallery—footage no one in his household intended to take,” the lawsuit said.

Backlash against Meta’s smart glasses continues to grow, with some people calling the eyewear “pervert glasses.”

People also worry that companies are using their videos and photos to build AI features without consent. Other companies, including Disney and Apple, have also been hit with lawsuits alleging they illegally collected biometric data without people’s consent.

Meta has been marketing smart glasses as a way to listen to audio, take phone calls, capture video and talk to its AI assistant without having to whip out a smartphone. The company teamed up with celebrities including Kylie Jenner to advertise the eyewear.

The company said it includes privacy protections, such as a light that signals when the glasses are recording.

The 230-page lawsuit, filed in a federal court in Northern California, accuses Meta of fraud and false advertising, along with violating other consumer protection laws in various states.

Tina Wolfson, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said the case also centers on Meta’s surveillance of people’s lives without their consent and the exploitation of their image and likeness.

“People who bought these glasses and thought that they were cool gadgets weren’t aware that every time they activated AI, video was sent to train Meta’s AI,” said Wolfson, a principal at law firm Ahdoot & Wolfson in Burbank.

Meta disagrees with the allegations and intends to fight them.

“If you use Meta AI, we may review that data to help improve our products and people’s experiences – this works the same way as many other companies. We take steps to filter this data to help remove identifying information and to protect people’s privacy,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement.

The lawsuit cites a lengthy article about Meta’s AI glasses by Swedish newspapers Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten.

The investigation, published in February, involved interviewing more than 30 employees at Meta’s subcontractor Sama and former Meta employees. Some workers in Kenya who reviewed images captured on smart glasses told the news outlet that faces sometimes appeared even when they were supposed to be blurred.

The lawsuit alleges people wearing the smart glasses were unwittingly transmitting data to Meta whenever they used Meta AI by saying “Hey Meta,” or sometimes accidentally when adjusting the glasses.

“Every activation of the AI features, intentional or accidental, captures video and audio that is transmitted to Meta’s servers, routed overseas, and reviewed by low-paid human workers who watch, label, and embed these moments into Meta’s AI models,” the lawsuit said.

Meta’s website states that when a user asks Meta AI about what’s in front of them, like a menu or plant, the camera gets activated so the AI assistant can help answer the question. Faces and license plates are blurred. The website also states that only the people who take photos and videos can see the images unless they choose to share them.

Steven Beltran, a California resident who frequently used Meta’s smart glasses, alleges that the gadget would “falsely activate twice a day.”

One smart glasses wearer in Los Angeles, referred to as PL01, used Meta’s AI assistant during an “intimate moment in the privacy of his bedroom” but also used the gadget to play music, ask questions and capture other private moments, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit also seeks to block Meta from deploying biometric tools through its glasses. The company has been exploring a controversial feature called “NameTag” that would allow people to identify others.

Meta’s Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bosworth said during a July podcast that the feature would allow people to remember the names of others they met in real life.

The American Civil Liberties Union and more than 70 organizations, though, said in an April letter to Meta it poses a “serious threat to privacy and civil liberties” and urged the company to commit to not releasing any facial recognition features.

A separate lawsuit, filed in September in a federal court in Illinois, alleges Meta has been using images of people’s faces uploaded to their public Facebook and Instagram accounts to train AI that powers NameTag and other AI tools.

Referring to NameTag as the “dystopian privacy invasion nobody asked for,” the lawsuit alleges that Meta uses images on Facebook and Instagram to “create biometric identifiers and information” that could be used to power the feature to identify people through smart glasses.

The people suing Meta in the Illinois lawsuit are part of a proposed class-action lawsuit that includes California resident Jeremy Wahl, who posted photos of himself and his daughter to his Facebook and Instagram accounts. His Instagram account is public while his Facebook account used to be public.

Meta never notified him that his photos were being used to train NameTag but the lawsuit said he believes that’s happening.

“People shouldn’t have to worry if their biometric information will be misused simply because their photographs appear on a social media platform,” said Wexler Boley & Elgersma partner Justin Boley, who is representing the plaintiffs, in a statement.

Meta said it’s been transparent about how it uses social media data to improve and build its AI products. The company hasn’t released the name tagging feature.

“If we do decide to roll something out, we will take a thoughtful approach and do so with full transparency,” a Meta spokesman said. “One decision we can be clear about — we are not building a universal face database.”

Meta is expected to unveil its latest lineup of wearables on Sept. 23 at its developers conference in Menlo Park.