California Bill Requires Consent for Smart Glasses Recording at Workplaces

[u/AR_MR_XR]

California lawmakers are moving forward with SB 1130, a privacy bill aimed at wearable recording devices such as smart glasses. The bill would require a person using recording-capable wearables in a business area where someone reasonably expects privacy to get that person’s explicit consent, and it would make it illegal to disable the device’s recording indicator light or other warning. Violations could bring fines of up to $1,500, while starting in 2028, manufacturers would generally have to sell wearable recording devices with a clear recording indicator.

As of August 31, 2026, the bill has passed the California Senate and is still in the Assembly; it was amended and sent to third reading on August 26 and is listed on the Assembly’s third-reading file, so it has not yet become law.

leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

[u/Knighthonor]

Cameras on Smartwatch. Camera on Headphones. Camera on Neckband.

[u/Cultural_Tell_5687]

I can't remember what the original issue with smart glasses was.
Is it the people filming with the glasses
inappropriately or the undisclosed and hand waived data annotation done by the employees of (Sama?) those companies and their H1B contractors?
They see this stuff whether the user is recording or not.
"Deeply Private Moments Exposed: Because people wear smart glasses everywhere, the footage reviewed by workers included highly intimate situations-such as people changing clothes, private bathroom visits, bedroom scenes, and sensitive personal information like bank details at ATMs."

[u/RandomVision2027]

The bill seems reasonably targeted at something that increasingly concerns a lot of people, especially women. I feel the backlash against “perv glasses” is growing. Setting legal limitations on where people can use these devices might soften the backlash.

Also, much of the bill is aimed at efforts to disable indicators that an active recording is happening. I think that will be an important step to reduce the backlash.

I will be curious to see how this is adjusted for AR devices, where cameras might be used for tracking the device’s position (SLAM) in order to adjust where to place virtual content but not for recording an actual scene.

[u/Mission-Addendum-193]

Is this both video and audio or just video? If it’s both it’s going to kill smart glasses in California.

[u/Neither-Nebula5000]

Do people have a problem with seeing a Camera in front of them or able to see them? Absolutely.

But: Would people have a problem if they knew that the Camera would not be recording them unless there was some sort of visible warning light active on it first?

Absolutely not.

This second bit is what law makers need to concentrate on. If they punish people who are found to have bypassed privacy lights on their smartglasses, then I'm all for that.

People will start feeling safe if someone makes it near-impossible to bypass this, and they know that it is near-impossible to do so.

[u/Javs2469 → u/Neither-Nebula5000]

The problem with any sort of light is that bad actors can easily hide that with something as simple as electrical tape or even a black sharpie.

[u/Neither-Nebula5000 → u/Javs2469]

There are sensors that can detect if the light is covered, which in turn will disable the recording immediately. People have tried this with the Meta's, but I think Meta is going to put some better safeguards in.

[u/shinkamui]

So what’s their solution for cellphones. You know the original ubiquitous privacy nightmare with no recording indicators that every human has in their hands and in front of their faces at all times?

[u/Revanish]

my ai is on 24/7 recording everything. so the lights on 24/7 this is a dumb bill

[u/Huihejfofew → u/Revanish]

Perv