Is It Legal to Ban Google Glass?

Author: Carlton Purvis, Published on Mar 28, 2014

No longer are facility based surveillance cameras alone watching you. 

Now you must contend with people wearing personal ones.

San Francisco bars and restaurants are starting to ban patrons from wearing Google Glass inside their establishments, some citing privacy concerns. And one resident is compiling a list of the places than ban audio and video recordings, what he calls Glasshole-Free establishments. Here’s the incident credited with starting the bans:

** ****** *** ******** ***** ************ ******* ***** ******** ***. 

*** *** **** ******* **** ****** ******* ******** ****.

*** ********* **** *** *********** *** ******** ** *** ******* from ******* ****** ***** ****** ***** **************, **** ****** ******* concerns. *** *** ******** ** ********* * **** ** *** places **** *** ***** *** ***** **********, **** ** ***** Glasshole-Free **************. ****’* *** ******** ******** **** ******** *** ****:

[***************]

How ** *******

** *** ******* ***** ********* ****** ***** ********** ***** ****** got **** ** *********** ** * *** ********* *** **** patrons *** ****’* **** ** ** ******** ** *** ****** Glass *** *** *******. ****** *** ******** ** ******* ****** ** **** *** *********** ************* ***. ****** ** **** ******* ***** ********, ******** ******** ** ** *** ******** ************. ** ***** ******** *** ***** **** *** ** **** ripping *** ******* *** *** **** (** *** *** ** the ***** *****):

Glasshole-Free *****

**** ** **** ******* * **** ***************-****.***** ***** ****** ******* ****** *****. *** ******* ** *** website ******** ** *********, ****** ** ****’* **** ** *** the ******. ******** ****** **** **** ***** ** *** **** in *** **** *****

“** *** *** * ***, ****, ** **********, *** **** signs ** *** ** ** *** ********* **** *** ***'* allow *** *** ** ****** ***** ** ***** *****/***** ********* devices,************** *** ******** *** ******** ******* ******** ** ******** *** ***** ***,” he ****** ** *** ****.

Why *** **** *** ******* *********

**** ** *** **** ****’* ******* ** ***** **** ******* of *** ********* ***** **, *** ********* ********** ** ********** ** ***** ******. ***** ********** *** ** ****** ** **** ****: ** do’t **** ** **** *** ***** ** ***, *** ** know ** ******* *** *********. *** *** ********* *** ************* with ******* ***** **** ** ****** **** ********.

*** ***, *** *******, *** **** **** **. ** *** posted ** * ****** ***** ******** ****:

**** * ****** ****** **** **** **** *** *** **** to **** ***** **.

*****

**** * ***** **********, *** **** *** *********** **** *** right ** ****** **** ******* *** *** ***’* ** ** the ******. ** **** **** ** *** ****** ***** * certain ********** *** ******* *******, **** ***.

***********, ******************* ****** ********* *** ******** *********** *** ******* ** **** ******.

What ** *** *****

Comments (10)

It's like surveillance camera man but not a joke this time:

Wearable cameras are going to become an increasingly practical problem the easier, less expensive and more commonplace they become. Just like people have an expectation that they are not going to be watched going to the bathroom, they do not accept someone filming them up close like that.

For obvious reasons, the casino industry has been talking about this for a while now. Most have either banned them outright or are considering banning them.

How many of the bars that are banning GoogleGlass have CCTV systems?

Probably a lot of them have CCTV systems.

On the other hand, how often does CCTV video from bars go up on the Internet? Very rarely, not a real concern.

Compare to the risk of a random person deciding to upload it immediately to YouTube.

There is a big difference between a patron recording whatever they want and the owner of the establishment. The owner of the bar has the right to record what he wants for his own purposes. The general public can do so in their own home if they like too. I don't see an issue with people wearing them in public though.

As far as in the bathroom, there are already laws against that type of recording. No need for new laws when existing ones already apply.

This isn't just about Google Glass. The tsunami of wearable imaging that's about to flood the streets over the next five years is insane. And in many cases you'd never be able to tell at a dark bar that they're wearing full 1080p HD recording glasses. They'll just look like another hipster wearing clear lenses if it's dark or wearing their sunglasses when it's light out.

Pivothead's are the perfect example of that. THey're exploding right now and they're just the beginning. I know of at least three other manufacturer's in Asia tooling up production lines to start mass-producing very similar type devices and all of them will be under $300. Some under $150.

It's coming whether people like it or not. Laws and society will just have to adjust. You can ban Google glass as much as you want. But within the next five years everyone will be able to record HD video and audio and you'll never know where their camera is.

I see an opportunity for someone to invent a device that can detect surreptitious recorders. I'm sure casinos would line up to buy them.

Let 'em start a line.... :)

I wish Bill Gates would steal my ideas...

I believe that it comes down to the variances in what we consider "privacy".

In another post, I mention that I believe that privacy is not binary, it is a continuum.

If people say that, for example, in jail, you have no expectation of privacy, and the video gets released to YouTube, then it can be inferred that in ____, you have no expectation of privacy, so put the video on YouTube.

Therefore, why not put all of the video surveillance from your local bar on the web? Why not allow Google Glass everywhere?

Do you have an expectation of privacy in a nightclub? Do you have an expectation of privay in the parking lot of said nightclub? What about in the champaign room?

If it CAN be put on YouTube, assume that it will.

Privacy is not binary, it is a continuum. Privacy means privacy from whom.

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports on Legal

SimpliSafe Violating California, Florida, and Texas Licensing Laws on Aug 14, 2018
IPVM has verified that DIY security system provider SimpliSafe, founded in 2006 and acquired in June of 2018 at a billion dollar valuation, is...
Nortek Sues SDS, Battle Over Unpaid Bill and Cancelled Lines on Aug 13, 2018
Nortek and SDS legal battle continues. As IPVM reported, SDS sued Nortek alleging bribery and antitrust violation. However, Wave fired back at SDS,...
Axis / Avigilon Legal Battle Rises on Aug 09, 2018
In what is shaping up to be high-powered, will-not-back-down battle, Axis and Avigilon are squaring off in multiple legal contests. In 2017, IPVM...
Struggling Ascent Hiding Under Brinks on Aug 07, 2018
The market cap of Brinks Home Security, Monitronics, MONI, Ascent Capital Group (whatever one calls them) is down 96% over the past 5 years as the...
US Congress Passes Bill Banning Dahua and Hikvision on Aug 02, 2018
The bill banning US government use of Dahua and Hikvision products has been passed by both chambers of Congress (House vote, Senate vote). The US...
Wave Retorts: SDS 'Desperate' And 'Defeated' on Aug 01, 2018
Distributor SDS has sued Nortek and distributor Wave Electronics alleging bribery, conspiracy, antitrust violations and violations of state laws...
US SAFETY Act Examined Amid Vegas Shooting Lawsuit on Jul 25, 2018
Creating an international controversy, MGM Resorts has sued shooting victims, despite or perhaps because the Las Vegas gunman used the MGM-owned...
Bribes Alleged, Nortek Sued For Antritrust Violation on Jul 23, 2018
A case of an unhappy distributor rival or did a manufacturer accept bribes?  Nortek Security and Control has been sued by distributor Security...
Hikvision Fights Ban - Claims 'Red Scare', Hires 14 Term Ex-Congressman on Jul 11, 2018
Hikvision is fighting back against the House Bill Ban of their products. Hikvision has hired one of the biggest lobbying firms, led by a 14 term...
SIA Lobbyists Working On House Bill Ban of Dahua and Hikvision on Jul 10, 2018
While SIA is most known for ISC West, SIA maintains the industry's most significant lobbying organization to influence US government action. Last...

Most Recent Industry Reports

2Gig Gun Lock / Motion Detector Tested on Aug 17, 2018
Safer guns for families and an opportunity for security dealers to sell more services? That is the aim of Nortek's 2GIG 'Gun Motion Detector'...
Video Analytics Integration Guide on Aug 16, 2018
Video analytics is hot again (at least conceptually) but integrating video analytics with VMSes can be challenging. This is especially significant...
Hikvision IP Camera Critical Vulnerability 2018 Disclosed on Aug 16, 2018
The same day that the US government passed a prohibition on Hikvision cameras, Hikvision disclosed a critical vulnerability for its IP...
ISS VMS / Video Analytics Company Profile on Aug 16, 2018
Who is ISS? In the past few months, they had one of the craziest ISC West promo items in years. Then, they hired industry veteran and ex-Dahua...
Chinese OEM Avycon Gets ADI Push on Aug 15, 2018
Who is Avycon? An American company? A Korean company? A couple of guys relabelling Chinese products? The latter is the best explanation. While...
Backboxes for Video Surveillance Tutorial on Aug 15, 2018
Backboxes are a necessity in surveillance, whether for managing cable whips, recessing cameras, adding wireless radios. But it can be confusing to...
Genetec Stratocast / Comcast 'Motion Insights' Examined on Aug 15, 2018
Comcast recently announced "SmartOffice Motion Insights", an extension to their Genetec OEMed cloud video service (covered by IPVM here). This...
SimpliSafe Violating California, Florida, and Texas Licensing Laws on Aug 14, 2018
IPVM has verified that DIY security system provider SimpliSafe, founded in 2006 and acquired in June of 2018 at a billion dollar valuation, is...
Ban of Dahua and Hikvision Is Now US Gov Law on Aug 13, 2018
The US President has signed the 2019 NDAA into law, banning the use of Dahua and Hikvision (and their OEMs) for the US government, for US...
Cut Milestone Licensing Costs 80% By Using Hikvision and Dahua NVRs (Tested) on Aug 13, 2018
Enterprise VMS licensing can be quite expensive, with $200 or more per channel common, meaning a 100 camera system can cost $20,000 in VMS...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact