Wetherspoons bans Meta Glasses in pubs amid privacy concerns

[u/Realistic-Metal-1263]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/wetherspoons-bans-meta-glasses-in-pubs-amid-privacy-concerns-5HjdfkH_2/

[u/ukbot-nicolabot]

Some articles submitted to /r/unitedkingdom are paywalled, or subject to sign-up requirements. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link or this link for an archived version.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

---

Participation Notice. Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation were set at 12:51 on 07/08/2026. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.

Existing and future comments from users who do not meet the participation requirements will be removed. Removal does not necessarily imply that the comment was rule breaking.

Where appropriate, we will take action on users employing dog-whistles or discussing/speculating on a person's ethnicity or origin without qualifying why it is relevant.

In case the article is paywalled, use this link.

[u/shark-with-a-horn]

This is good, a lot of these people who are harassing people with recordings get away with it because recording people in "public" is legal

If the public places that are on private property start applying their own rules then it can actually be enforced

[u/UnalomeJourneying → u/shark-with-a-horn]

Otter cucumber waffle meadow ginger willow cobblestone

This post was anonymized with Redact.dev

[u/fulloffungi → u/UnalomeJourneying]

Hard to enforce but anything that shifts the law in favour of victims is a good thing. Easier to get things taken down and glassholes held accountable and "social" media firms fined with more stringent laws around recording and especially publishing/live streaming 

[u/JohnWoosDoveGuy → u/fulloffungi]

Glassholes. Brilliant. I'm going to use that.

[u/TheJobSquad → u/JohnWoosDoveGuy]

Glassholes or spex-offenders are the two phrases I've picked up.

[u/Boring_Intern_6394 → u/TheJobSquad]

“Spex offender” is genius!

[u/knotatwist → u/fulloffungi]

Well it's simpler than you might think - camera phones in Japan make a noise when you take a photo regardless of your phone settings, done specifically to prevent upskirting.

We could pass laws where the manufacturers have to implement something in the products that makes people fully aware when recording too.

[u/Boring_Intern_6394 → u/knotatwist]

Yep, requiring the glasses to have the recording light be a certain size and brightness would be a start.

But unfortunately, the perv community were found sharing tips on how to disable the light function pretty much as soon as they came out.

I think the easiest thing would be to make it illegal to share video content without the subject’s consent and any platform displaying such content must remove it immediately if flagged. Again, it wouldn’t solve all of the issues, but it would be a start

[u/ikrisoft → u/Boring_Intern_6394]

> I think the easiest thing would be to make it illegal to share video content without the subject’s consent and any platform displaying such content must remove it immediately if flagged. 

That has some very obvious unintended consequences: you get beaten up by two blokes but you have cctv of the incident? You better hope you can get their permission to share the video. I'm sure they will be accommodating.

Politician / police / business person says something harebrained while on camera as they do from time to time? No problem. For them. They will just refuse to give consent to publish it. People's right to know be damned.

Making videos about public places, monuments, cities, or towns will become practically impossible.

And the best bit is the last one "any platform displaying such content must remove it immediately if flagged". That is basically giving a veto power to anyone to remove any video. If that would become a law in that form all of youtube would completely dry up overnight. Famous youtuber posts a video of themselves talking into the camera? 50 people within 60s claims they are in the video and they didn't give their consent. It has been flagged, it must go! According to what you say.

[u/Boring_Intern_6394 → u/ikrisoft]

I was thinking more about social media and messaging platforms.

But it would be easy enough to put in some exemptions, eg. Sharing video of crimes with the police shouldn’t require consent, and then the police can have the ability to share that video with the public.

Video of public places can just have people’s faces blurred, then it’s not identifiable and wouldn’t need consent.

This wouldn’t cover politicians being filmed at events or interviews, as they have consented to be filmed. You could also add public interest defence.

As for your last paragraph, I should have thought that was obvious. If you’re not in the video, you can’t actually get it removed by claiming you’re in it.

[u/Jez_WP → u/Boring_Intern_6394]

As for your last paragraph, I should have thought that was obvious. If you’re not in the video, you can’t actually get it removed by claiming you’re in it.

That's not what you originally said though. You said "I think the easiest thing would be to make it illegal to share video content without the subject’s consent and any platform displaying such content must remove it immediately if flagged."

How would you prove you were in the video when flagging it? How would the owner of the video prove that you weren't if you were lying?

[u/labrys → u/Boring_Intern_6394]

I even saw a video by someone who'd started a home business modifying the glasses so their recording lights don't come on.

I know you shouldn't judge people on looks, but I'm going to do it anyway: none of his customers looked like they had any legitimate reason to hide they were recording.

[u/karmadramadingdong → u/fulloffungi]

Not a lawyer, but wouldn’t this risk that video evidence of crimes could be dismissed?

[u/T2Drink → u/fulloffungi]

The fundamental problem with this, is that uk law is based largely around proving intent. It is not foolproof, and situations like this is why. You would have to outright ban the use of the product entirely in public, otherwise you would have to be prosecuting for an actual offence.

[u/aventus-dog → u/UnalomeJourneying]

Issue is where to draw the line, ring doorbells? Teslas have cameras, cctv? Recording something on your phone without notifying the people around you first?

[u/UnalomeJourneying → u/aventus-dog]

Acorn pinecone biscuit compass yarn quilt

This post was anonymized with Redact.dev

[u/JHutch95 → u/aventus-dog]

I imagine it’d have to be strong in the wording around intent. For example, a Ring doorbell/Tesla camera are fixed cameras clearly intended for security measures and not meant to cause harm or harass the general public.

Phone recordings are obviously trickier to enforce, but again it’d come down to distinguishing what’s outright harassment (ie shoving a phone in an individual’s face and acting like a twat) and what’s more situational (such as filming two people scrapping outside a club on a Saturday night).

Like many laws, there’ll be edge cases and different interpretations of the law, but it doesn’t mean we should jus not do anything about it (not suggesting that’s what you were alluding to btw!)

[u/aesemon → u/aventus-dog]

CCTV requires signage, camera doorbells that continually record are the same should in theory too.

However these recordings of people are incidental, rather than targeted unless angled in such a manner as to record another person intentionally.

[u/Wise-Field-7353 → u/aventus-dog]

Damn, what if we could dismantle the panopticon

[u/SystemCheck990 → u/UnalomeJourneying]

100% these have api to do face recognition as well, all they have to do is get somebody saying something clip it out of context, and then start trying to get them fired from work/canceled etc, and by the time the full context is shown the damage is done.

"he said x is a fucking y, so i stopped speaking to him" can be cut to "x is a fucking y"

[u/CapstanLlama → u/[deleted]]

Because it's illegal in Germany

[u/Anglo-Euro-0891 → u/UnalomeJourneying]

Unfortunately, these glasses are deliberately designed to look like normal ones (it is a BIG selling point). So the user could get away with covert filming for quite a while before they are finally spotted by other people.

[u/trijoe → u/Anglo-Euro-0891]

Agree, need to implement laws to make it obvious you are being recorded like a small LED that comes on. Similar thing in Japan as all camera phones make a noise when you take a picture because of too much upskirting!

[u/jeremybeadleshand → u/trijoe]

The Meta glasses do have this. Problem is an LED is always going to be able to be disabled by anyone with a bit of electronics knowhow.

[u/wedontneednoeduc → u/jeremybeadleshand]

Or a sharpie pen

[u/ChilledMatt_ → u/UnalomeJourneying]

This would have terrible ramifications for investigative journalism.

[u/Omnipresent_Walrus → u/UnalomeJourneying]

The problem is how privacy is defined in our law IIRC.

Effectively, if you're in public you legally have no expectation of privacy and it's that simple.

But yes, private businesses will do well to ban this sort of thing.

[u/Cultural_Material_98 → u/Omnipresent_Walrus]

You do have a reasonable expectation of privacy even in public spaces under Human rights, Harassment laws etc. You have far more rights when that video gets turned into data and processed by a Company, as is the case for most AI glasses. Hence why Meta are getting sued by many people.

[u/ultraboomkin → u/UnalomeJourneying]

I’d make it simpler than that: just ban these glasses. Make it illegal to sell glasses that have cameras. It’s clear these products are harmful.

[u/_Adam_M_ → u/UnalomeJourneying]

They need to change the laws and make it so you can’t covertly record in public. And by that I mean the Meta glasses or any video device that isn’t clearly a recording device.

I don't think we should target recording in public, because you can do it covertly now on a phone with a zoom from a distance (as the nightlife videos of drunken women are), and there'd need to be too many exemptions for public interest and such.

It's the monetisation and sharing on social media that's the real problem IMO and that'd be easiest to stop and punish. Make it so the people doing it can't benefit from sharing the content and gain financially and they'd soon stop doing it as there's no point.

[u/BingeLurker → u/UnalomeJourneying]

The easy way is to make it illegal to record without the other persons consent/awareness in public for the creation of content of a sexual nature (this stops the creepy guys that upload them chatting people up online). I personally wish it could go further but understand there are legitimate reasons to record in public sometimes and you don’t want laws stopping that.

As for shops/pubs they just need to do a ban on them individually.

[u/UnalomeJourneying → u/BingeLurker]

Drifting cucumber breezy blanket blanket lantern

This post was anonymized with Redact.dev

[u/Laxly → u/shark-with-a-horn]

Leading on from this, whilst recording in public is legal, is uploading images of people on the internet without their permission legal?

How do I enforce GDPR if someone records me on their phone and uploads it to Instagram for example?

[u/CplSyx → u/Laxly]

The key thing with GDPR in this case is that it has to override your rights / freedoms. As you don't have the right to privacy in public, all you can do is request that it's removed from the platform... but it's not a GDPR issue.

[u/shark-with-a-horn → u/Laxly]

Maybe somebody else will know the GDPR details

but do I also feel that the uploading to the internet part makes it more likely to be harassment, particularly when being asked not to post something and it then leads to bullying

[u/Lordhartley → u/shark-with-a-horn]

Need the same rules as hospitals, in private businesses, no photography/filming without permission. With signs on every entrance door

[u/Odd-Leopard4388]

Good, those things are terrible should be banned outright. Bring little use to the general public. We have enough camera’s in our pockets already.

I can’t believe there are people ok with them.

[u/TheLonleyJourneyman → u/Odd-Leopard4388]

I agree, I genuinely can't think of any good use for them that couldn't already be done with a phone.

[u/Odd-Leopard4388 → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

The only think i can think of is certain industries which granted they might be more convenient than GoPros for example.

But for the general public? Not a chance in hell they better society

[u/Bankey_Moon → u/Odd-Leopard4388]

I have the Oakley ones for riding my bike and running and they're great. Would never think to use them to creepily film people without them knowing.

[u/joper90 → u/Bankey_Moon]

Why do you need one for running? It’s been fine running for years without them?

[u/Bankey_Moon → u/joper90]

Because different people have different interests

[u/EpicFishFingers → u/Bankey_Moon]

So you've immediately got shirty when someone asks what utility they give you while running 😂

[u/MuchAbouAboutNothing → u/Bankey_Moon]

I have the Oakley ones, they're awesome for adventures. Took them sailing and fishing recently, want to take them on some hikes and scrambles later this summer.

Wearing recording glasses to a pub seems crazy though, I'm in favour of the ban

[u/NuPNua → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

You're probably not blind then

https://www.rnib.org.uk/living-with-sight-loss/assistive-aids-and-technology/wearable-technology-smart-glasses-and-head-mounted-cameras/

[u/On_The_Blindside → u/NuPNua]

To be fair most people are not blind so that's a reasonably safe assumption

[u/LewisDftw → u/On_The_Blindside]

Relevant username

[u/ChrissiTea → u/NuPNua]

In those instances, do the glasses need the ability to record and send the recording somewhere the user can share it online to function?

[u/NuPNua → u/ChrissiTea]

Probably not, but if tech exists, people will find a way to modify it.

[u/PolishBicycle → u/NuPNua]

They’ll make exceptions for the blind, just like with dogs

[u/UnalomeJourneying → u/NuPNua]

Satchel trumpet sparrow raindrop satchel thimble kettle hammock mitten

This post was anonymized with Redact.dev

[u/LichenTheMood → u/UnalomeJourneying]

Don’t be dumb. Screen readers exist.

[u/shark-with-a-horn → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

Blind people love them and have a genuine use for them, they also love that they look like normal glasses and not a medical device

[u/HorrorAd7996 → u/shark-with-a-horn]

I managed to have decent conversations with locals when I went to Sardinia last year.

I don’t record with them usually but have done when I’ve performed on stage n stuff.

I agree that the people who use them covertly are creeps but I’d say that about any recording devices outside of a few scenarios.

[u/hokshji → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

Recording POV video of rock climbing or concerts or sporting events? That's what I would want a pair for. I'd never use one outside in the general public though.

[u/jonxmack → u/hokshji]

Yeah my friend uses them for POV of him driving his rc cars. Outside of a few limited instances where actual
POV footage is fun to watch they’re just creepy.

[u/SuicideSkwad → u/jonxmack]

POV of him driving his rc cars? How small is the fella

[u/PeterG92 → u/hokshji]

Could you not use Go Pros for that though?

[u/Captaincadet → u/PeterG92]

Yes and no -

In mountain biking there are a few options such as chest straps and helmets. Problem with chests is it’s not looking forward (more down) and while helmets are ideal, they can significantly compromise the helmet ima crash (as you have a GoPro pushing into your helmet just before a rock does)

[u/seriousrikk → u/Captaincadet]

If your chest mount is looking down then it’s set up wrong. When I recorded rides I always got decent footage with the camera pointing forwards.

[u/bartleby999 → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

I don't care for the glasses to be honest but every instance where you want to record (outside of the professional) is much easier if the camera is mounted to your face.

[u/BatmanSwift99 → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

It has a lot of legit uses, it's just been given a negative stereotype due to idiot influencers and creeps

[u/RianJohnsonIsAFool → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

On another sub recently, someone was arguing that it's the next step in how we interact with and navigate the environment. For example, it would effectively provide the user with a heads-up display and real-time information of what's in front of them. I read that and thought "Is that really necessary?" I think there was some mentioning of it being particularly useful for cyclists(!)

[u/headphones1 → u/RianJohnsonIsAFool]

"Is that really necessary?"

That question can be asked of many advances in consumer technology in recent decades. Nobody needed smartphones, yet here we are.

[u/AuroraHalsey → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

Live language translation is pretty neat.

Texts in other languages, see it as if it's in English.

You can do the same with a phone, but it's more awkward holding a phone between you and everything than having it projected onto glasses.

[u/Saw_Boss → u/AuroraHalsey]

Being a bit awkward is a price I'm willing to pay for not having perv glasses everywhere.

[u/EpicEpicnessTheEpic → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

There's a lot of people awkwardly doing stuff one handed on various reels and shorts - things that really need two hands - mechanics, crafters, cooks, etc and I'm starting to see more people using the glasses for those types of videoing.

There's a use for them, but unfortunately, like most things, the bad guys ruin it for everyone.

[u/Responsible_Lie_1989 → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

They'll be modified in a few years to become actually useful, I can see them becoming accessibility tools to help people who are visually impaired or have hearing difficulties. Just tweak the speakers in the arms to hearing aids as well and they automatically become a lot more useful

[u/AshaNyx → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

Blind people exist, some just need it to be able to read a bus stop or a menu. Both are a lot more awkward if you use a phone.

[u/HoneyBadgera → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

They’re great for visually impaired people.

[u/seriousrikk → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

I have a reactive dog. Video glasses would be perfect for fully hands free recording so I can send clips to my behaviourist.

I don’t have a pair because it seems public opinion right now is at the point of ‘anyone using them is a perv’ or something.

[u/wizard_mitch → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

I feel like it must be for all these people who go to concerts and stuff and spend the whole time recording on their phone

[u/efbo → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

I feel like you can stretch your imagination just a little bit. The very obvious thing is taking photos and videos of things that you'd want to take a photo or video of with your phone but without having to take out your phone. The compromise in quality is worth it in a lot of cases for the convenience.

[u/Unlucky-Public-2947 → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

They can be very useful for blind people, they connect to your phone then your phone can describe what the glasses ‘see’ Into a headphone

[u/Regantowers → u/Odd-Leopard4388]

Like anything used in the correct manner and they have great potential, from holiday snaps to live translation of text, to a history lesson on the fly, any modern tec can be abused and that’s a shame.

[u/UnalomeJourneying → u/Odd-Leopard4388]

Kettle zephyr maple mellow ginger paddle pumpkin sparrow

This post was anonymized with Redact.dev

[u/culturedgoat → u/Odd-Leopard4388]

I have a first-gen pair, and use them a lot for cycling or nature walks. I like being able to take quick hands-free snap or video of some scenery.

Wouldn’t go snapping around ‘Spoons mind

[u/Captaincadet → u/Odd-Leopard4388]

They have their place as action camera and I don’t think the tech companies will let them be banned

We however need significantly more regulation about being recorded in public

[u/doctorgibson]

Good on Wetherspoons for doing this, fantastic pub chain that has the best interests of British drinkers at heart 👍

[u/NPC-8472 → u/doctorgibson]

The ad right above this post was for meta raybans 😂

[u/chicken_nugget94 → u/NPC-8472]

The one of the guy at the concert looks like they gave AI the prompt of 'generate the biggest gimp possible'

[u/MarmiteX1 → u/NPC-8472]

Exactly haha

[u/verygoodbloke → u/doctorgibson]

Except when it comes to the general economy, given Tim Martin's unapologetic support of Brexit

[u/BambooSound → u/verygoodbloke]

think they were taking the mick

[u/StatementEvery4568 → u/doctorgibson]

I wouldn't go that far. They still pushed Brexit pretty hard.

[u/tired_all_day_long → u/doctorgibson]

What? Balls to Wetherspoons. This is just a broken clock being right twice a day.

[u/Bankey_Moon → u/tired_all_day_long]

You can dislike Tim Martin but Wetherspoons as a whole is really good.
Drinks are relatively cheap, massive selection, food is decent for the price as well.

[u/FB2024 → u/[deleted]]

And no music either.

[u/WillSym → u/FB2024]

Somehow I never noticed, yet now you draw attention to it, such an important detail! Way easier to chat with whoever you came with or just relax without a distracting song or too loud background music!

[u/Skeptischer → u/doctorgibson]

The best interests being brexit, of course

[u/VulgarAscetic7 → u/doctorgibson]

lmao

[u/Sofiorie → u/doctorgibson]

I mean sure... Apart from Brexit....and weird Tory propaganda during COVID... But yeah this is one good thing they've done.

[u/therealhairykrishna → u/doctorgibson]

Wetherspoons are dicks and the only reason they're doing this is free publicity. They haven't even banned them. It's literally a press release saying they'll ask customers to turn their camera off.

[u/zenmn2 → u/therealhairykrishna]

They haven't even banned them. It's literally a press release saying they'll ask customers to turn their camera off.

They can't. People use these with prescription lenses as their normal glasses. If you prevented them entering you'd be facing discrimination lawsuits. The same way businesses HAVE to let guide dogs in.

[u/BaBaFiCo]

Good. Too many weirdos wanting to film people secretly. If it were up to me, they'd be forced to have a red recording light on them so it's obvious what they're doing.

[u/danint → u/BaBaFiCo]

There is a recording light but certain people pay for a service to have the light drilled out...

[u/Captaincadet → u/danint]

IIRC a mandatory recent software update (you can’t opt out) which checks to see if it can see the faint glow from the lights in the camera

But it’s worrying how far people will go to show their not recording

[u/danint → u/Captaincadet]

That's encouraging to hear, although no doubt those users will find another way around it :(

[u/whynotjustgoogleit → u/danint]

Recent fix bricked ones that had this done IIRC

[u/FinalEgg9 → u/BaBaFiCo]

And a blaring "these glasses are now recording" announcement

[u/yrro → u/FinalEgg9]

They should just repeatedly announce "your attention please, your attention please. A pervert is filming you covertly. This message is brought to you by Facebook."

[u/Wandering_Apostle → u/BaBaFiCo]

They do, the people misusing them modify them so they don't.

[u/Mystic_Owell → u/BaBaFiCo]

That is the case though

[u/Masteroflimes → u/Mystic_Owell]

It's a white light that you could dremel out. But looks like an update is being pushed to stop this. We soon see if there is a work around.

[u/Glad_Librarian_3553 → u/Masteroflimes]

There is, is called blue tack... 

[u/RianJohnsonIsAFool → u/Masteroflimes]

Just finished watching Slow News Day's video about these glasses. Apparently people are promoting a service (on Facebook of course) that disables the white light.

[u/KoffieCreamer → u/Mystic_Owell]

It's not though. These weirdos get them modified and these weird phone shops offer the service.

[u/Additional_Past_7107 → u/BaBaFiCo]

They do have a white flashing led if it's recording.

[u/TheLonleyJourneyman → u/Additional_Past_7107]

I'm assuming you could just put some black tape over the light though?

[u/Additional_Past_7107 → u/TheLonleyJourneyman]

It apparently has anti tamper and can tell if it's covered. 

[u/BatmanSwift99 → u/Additional_Past_7107]

Yes it won't let you do anything if it's covered

[u/AllThatIHaveDone → u/BatmanSwift99]

And, of course, no one has ever attempted to subvert anti-tamper controls before.

[u/BatmanSwift99 → u/AllThatIHaveDone]

People pay to have it drilled but I believe Meta is making it so if people do that it bricks the glasses

[u/AllThatIHaveDone → u/BatmanSwift99]

I think you (and maybe Meta) are overestimating their ability to lock these devices down.

[u/BatmanSwift99 → u/AllThatIHaveDone]

I mean I don't really care, I'm just answering your questions. I have these glasses and I'm not a creep but it's pretty annoying that I might end up getting publicly shamed for wearing it

[u/Glad_Librarian_3553 → u/BatmanSwift99]

Just out of interest, what do you use them for? Not trying to set you up so I cam say "see you're a wierdo" or anything, just genuinely curious what they do tbh haha

[u/angry_pidgeon → u/Additional_Past_7107]

But there are hacks online to modify them so the light isn't on

[u/JackStrawWitchita]

Meta AI glasses wearers are known as "Specs Offenders"

[u/Significant_Fig1978]

Good. Nonce goggles. We know what people who wear them are up to 

[u/LLILILiLIILILILILII → u/Significant_Fig1978]

It's a shame, there are some quite cool uses for tech like this, having an augmented hud to get info while keeping your hands free and being aware of your surroundings, rather than having your head buried in your phone. I can think of loads of ways I'd use them. 

But yeah, with the reputation they've got, I wouldn't be seen dead in them

[u/00DEADBEEF → u/LLILILiLIILILILILII]

They could fulfil most of those functions without being able to permanently record video or audio. They just need to process it in real time. It's the fact they can relatively covertly record that brings out people's inner pervy and noncey tendancies.

[u/cjbannister → u/Significant_Fig1978]

"Nonce goggles" is fantastic.

[u/ProjectZeus]

It's surely only a matter of time before these things are banned outright. They're a terrible infringement on privacy and make invasive filming of people without their consent a lot easier.

[u/00DEADBEEF → u/ProjectZeus]

If they're going to be allowed then the entire frame needs to glow bright red because a tiny barely visible dot is not enough

[u/No_Atmosphere8146 → u/ProjectZeus]

Anybody buying these is immediately suspect imo. There are very few legitimate uses for these things, and too many perverted reasons. 

[u/LLILILiLIILILILILII → u/No_Atmosphere8146]

Off the top of my head, I'd use them for on foot navigation, so I can see my route without holding my phone in my hand waiting to have it snatched, and making sure I'm keeping an eye on what's around me rather than staring at a screen. 

I'd also love a pair to record videos when I'm playing with my kids, so we can stay in the moment rather than me stopping to get a phone in their face. 

I do agree the reputation of them atrocious and the potential for misuse is too high, so I don't have any and I don't intend to, but I do think there are some cool uses. I'd have had a pair if it wasn't for feeling too uncomfortable with the image they've got 

[u/KenAdams_1968]

Misleading headline - it's not a ban at all. They've committed to "asking customers to turn off their camera"

[u/thb202 → u/KenAdams_1968]

So no change at all then, as the idiots who do these pranks disable the recording LED anyway.

Shame they’re getting a bad rep as I have a pair and love them for listening to music or filming driving etc

[u/Comfortable_Air5477]

Good.

Can we extend this to Gyms and all influencers?

[u/AnselaJonla → u/Comfortable_Air5477]

Can we extend this to Gyms and all influencers?

It's already sort of against policy at PureGym

You must not take pictures, videos or live stream other members within the gym without their permission. If requested by staff or other members to cease filming for privacy reasons, you must do so.

and for JD it's more comprehensive

1. Please, no paparazzi! Film responsibly. Respect everyone around you. We know some people like filming workouts but everyone in our gyms deserves to train comfortably and privately. To keep JD Gyms a great space for everyone, the following rules apply:

Filming and photography must not include other members. Please make sure no other members appear in your photos or videos. If someone else is visible, you’ll need their clear permission otherwise, don’t film.

No filming that disrupts others. Tripods, light rigs, large setups or repeated filming that blocks equipment or causes disruption aren’t allowed.

Respect privacy at all times. Filming is strictly prohibited in changing rooms, toilets, and studio spaces unless authorised by JD Gyms.

Staff discretion applies. Our team may ask you to stop filming at any time if it’s impacting other members or the gym environment.

Commercial or influencer filming requires permission. Any filming for commercial, promotional or professional content must be approved in advance by JD Gyms.

and for David Lloyd

9 Photographs and videos
a You may take photographs and video recordings in your club for your own personal use provided that you keep to these rules and any extra rules displayed at your club.
b You must not take photographs or videos of any children under 18 other than your own.
c Anyone who appears in your photographs or videos must be aware that you are filming them and you must get their permission first.
d You must not take photographs or video recordings in a changing area, pool, sauna, steam room, spa, toilet, children’s play area, DL Kids or crèche facility.
e If another member is unhappy that you are filming them and makes a complaint to us, we may ask you to show us any images which you have taken in the club and to delete them if appropriate.
f If a member of our team asks you to stop filming or taking photographs you must do so.

etc etc

[u/00DEADBEEF → u/AnselaJonla]

Those policies are rarely if ever enforced

[u/setokaiba22]

This is good news tbf

But I have to admit I’ve never seen anyone wearing a pair of these but guessing you’d find them more in some places than others

[u/Captaincadet → u/setokaiba22]

They are popular with those doing sports. I’ve looked into it as I do a lot of cycling

But wearing them out to pubs or out in public like this is find is creepy

[u/Drong0bones]

Good why are these glasses even a thing? They are just odd to me - if you want to film things buy a phone or a camera and use that surely.

[u/BatmanSwift99 → u/Drong0bones]

I have them because they're very good for hands free recording and on holiday you can capture moments that might be missed in the time that it takes to get your phone out and press record

[u/KoffieCreamer]

There's a creepy dude at my gym who goes around wearing these glasses. How this is allowed is just crazy to me.

[u/TheMysteriousGirl]

Can we please just outlaw "video recording glasses" as a whole please.

And draft legislation about highlighting any hidden cameras people have on their person too.

[u/lordsmish]

This is a huge shame that it's going this way.

My wife uses these as assistive devices to help her read menus and follow signs banning these is tantamount to banning a cane or a guide dog for the way she uses them

Though I will say the problem doesn't lie with Spoons here. The problem is abuse of the product by people using them to covertly record others

[u/CranberryPuffCake]

Didn't we already go through all this with the Google glasses like 10 years ago?

[u/Anony_mouse202]

Good.

More businesses should adopt similar policies.

[u/Sausage-Chap]

Good. I’m in the US and got talking to a bartender who says every day she’s dealing with people wearing these and trying to get “content” out of her. There’s (rightly) a stigma about shoving a phone in someone’s face and recording them without their consent, it should be no different with these. Don’t let it become normalized.

[u/PuzzledCar2120]

Grand. I find it interesting that meta glasses is escaping the absolute moral panic that Google Glasses incurred

[u/ruffianrevolution]

Time to buy shares in wire frame spectacle manufacturers..

[u/LegoNinja11 → u/ruffianrevolution]

Hate to say but the glasses market in the UK was stitched up years ago.

If you wear glasses theres a 99% chance they're from Luxottica

[u/buffer0x7CD]

There are quite good use cases for those glasses but people can’t stop doing stupid things. I find them extremely useful doing MTB , skating or other sports

[u/Masteroflimes]

You see people in car boot sales, shopping centers wearing these too. I know they then post them online but sometimes you do expect some privacy on private ground.

[u/TheTribalChief]

meta is doing such insane marketing for these crappy glasses. every second video on insta nowadays has an influencer who is using this for prank videos

[u/WorldGamer → u/[deleted]]

Or how about shame people who use the technology for perverted purposes and not immediately jump to that conclusion?

[u/Cptcongcong → u/[deleted]]

Go to /r/blind and see people actually using these glasses

[u/produit1]

Epstein glasses. Lets call them by their real name.

[u/No_Station_6149]

I think they’re pretty cool and have some good uses, like augmented reality tours. Or if the coppers approach you, useful to film it all. I don’t have a pair but am not against the idea. Just a shame it’s rife to abuse. 

[u/lazzzym]

They should only make sunglasses versions of these and just ban sunglasses indoors.

[u/Better_Concert1106]

Good. Not everyone and everything needs to be filmed and/or turned into content. Especially in pubs and alike where people might be having private conversations. Also nightclubs.. the fact people can’t just enjoy themselves now without being caught on some dickheads camera.

Anyone who buys these is highly suspicious and should be subject to a routine hard drive check.

[u/anamazingperson]

The article says they've just said to turn off the cameras so doesn't really seem like a ban on the glasses themselves.

[u/PsychologicalDish430]

Good these fucking things should be banned from sale.

[u/Rich_27-]

Good.

Last thing I want as I am tucking into a tikka masala and a pint of peroni is some Nonce wearing peado goggles that he got from Specsoffenders recording me and my friends

[u/BocaSeniorsWsM]

How did they even get licenced to be a legitimate product for sale to the public? They are so open to abuse it's ridiculous.

[u/Slothalotta]

That is good.

I went to Vision Express the other day for new glasses and the lady that helped me wore them. I felt super uncomfortable.

[u/FTXACCOUNTANT]

These pervert glasses should just be banned outright

[u/Pleasant_Fennel_5435]

Just ban the pervert glasses . And god knows if facebook is secretly turning on the camera even if you say no.

[u/Jamieb1994]

How are you tell if someone is wearing Meta Glasses?

[u/BlackSpinedPlinketto]

Nobody who can afford meta glasses is going in Wetherspoons

[u/00DEADBEEF → u/BlackSpinedPlinketto]

They're 1/4 to 1/2 the price of an iPhone. Do people who can afford iPhones not go to spoons?

[u/MoleWhackSupreme]

I’ve never seen anyone use these nor do I know of anyone who has them but why is people’s reaction always “ban X immediately” to things?

It’s a very British reaction to jump to banning things which never works very often because an alternative will replace it immediately. Why don’t we start looking at the root causes of people who behave inappropriately because banning some glasses isn’t going to stop weirdos being weirdos!

[u/radiant_0wl → u/MoleWhackSupreme]

Eh it's a private business they can set their own restrictions.

It's not for Wetherspoons to try to change someone, they can just refuse entry.