Norway Ban on Camera-Enabled Smart Glasses: What's Proposed
Norway's government wants tighter rules for smart glasses, and it has floated one specific tool: banning facial-recognition features that would let a wearer identify strangers on the street. That is a proposal to regulate one function, not a plan for a blanket ban that outlaws the devices themselves.
Digitalisation Minister Karianne Tung said last week the government plans to regulate "smart glasses and similar devices more strictly than today," pointing to privacy pressure from new technology that pairs artificial intelligence with cameras and microphones (Euronews; Straits Times/AFP).
The government has not announced a draft law, timetable or enforcement plan. Its statement set out a direction and one worked example of what stricter rules could include, nothing more (Euronews).
Why the Norway smart glasses ban debate centers on facial recognition
Tung's stated concern is broader than any single device. "We can see that people's private lives and privacy are coming under pressure from new technology," she said, describing a trend of AI combined with cameras and microphones built into glasses, earbuds, caps and other everyday objects (Straits Times/AFP).
From that broad concern, she named one concrete example. Stricter rules "could, for example" include banning facial-recognition functions that identify other people in public spaces, Tung said, framing it as an illustration rather than settled policy (Euronews).
The ministry laid out two immediate steps: it will assemble an expert advisory group to counsel the government on protecting consumers from the technology, and it is asking public and private organizations to consider drafting their own guidelines in the meantime (Euronews; Biometric Update).
Norway's Consumer Council welcomed the move but wants the government to go further. Its head of digital policy, Finn Lutzow-Holm Myrstad, urged retailers to stop selling smart glasses altogether until there is legal clarity, a sign the advocacy community sees Tung's announcement as an opening move rather than a fix (Straits Times/AFP).
Facial recognition catches identification, not filming
A facial-recognition ban targets one capability: software that can identify a person captured on camera. It says nothing about the simpler act of recording someone on video or audio, a distinction Myrstad drew directly.
He said Meta has reportedly built a facial-recognition feature ready to be integrated into its smart glasses, calling the risk of misuse urgent. "Meta already has this technology ready to go, and it is only a matter of time before it is rolled out in the glasses," he said (Straits Times/AFP).
His warning about the fix Tung floated was just as direct. A ban on facial recognition, Myrstad said, "would not prevent wearers from filming people covertly." He added: "The potential for abuse is enormous" (Straits Times/AFP).
What a broader rule would need to cover
Tung's own language hints at a wider target than glasses alone. She described a trend of AI paired with cameras and microphones in "glasses, earbuds, caps, and other items we use in everyday life," and said the goal is to stop that equipment from being used to monitor people in public (Straits Times/AFP).
That phrasing signals where the government's concern sits, not what any future rule will cover. Neither the ministry's statement nor the reporting on it specifies whether a regulation would apply only to real-time identification or also reach the recording, storage and sharing of footage afterward.
Any rule broad enough to catch cameras generally runs into legitimate use cases. Smart glasses handle calls, translate signs, provide navigation, and connect to AI assistants; both Euronews and The Guardian note they are also valued tools for blind and visually impaired users (Euronews; The Guardian). Australia's online safety regulator has flagged the same tension in its own privacy review, warning that companies may end up weighing accessibility benefits against safety and privacy instead of addressing them separately (The Guardian).
Three approaches from Australia's parallel debate
Norway is not the only government wrestling with these devices. Australia's parliament is having a similar fight, and the proposals on its table show the options available once a government moves past a statement of intent.
Critics in Australia have nicknamed the devices "pervert glasses" for their capacity to record and livestream people without their knowledge (ABC News). Concerns there have focused as much on falling prices as on covert filming: early smart glasses cost about $500, while newer entrants now sell for well under $100, with basic models available for as little as $40 (ABC News). Two petitions calling for restrictions on sale and import have drawn tens of thousands of signatures in recent weeks (ABC News).
Three approaches have emerged from that pressure:
- Restrict the hardware. Greens senators plan to introduce a bill for a 12-month import ban on wearable recording devices while stronger privacy law is drafted. The federal government said this week it is "not specifically" consulting on any import restriction as part of its current privacy reforms, though the attorney-general added the government is "not ruling anything out" (ABC News).
- Regulate the conduct. The same bill would also amend the Privacy Act to prohibit filming, storing or sharing footage from a wearable device without express consent, extending the law from large organizations to individuals for the first time and adding new enforcement powers for the privacy commissioner (ABC News).
- Recommend the design. Australia's online safety regulator, eSafety, has suggested smart glasses should automatically blur bystanders' faces while filming, a technical fix aimed at covert recording rather than facial identification (The Guardian).
The national proposals have not been enacted. Brisbane City Council, however, has already banned covert filming with smart glasses and other wearable devices at public pools, a sign local government is moving faster than federal lawmakers on this issue (ABC News).
Greens senator David Shoebridge called the government's broader privacy overhaul, unveiled this week, "a modest step forward" that still needs to be extended to cover wearable devices (ABC News).
What comes next for Norway
Norway's process is still at the announcement stage. The next formal step the government has named is the expert group Tung plans to appoint, which is expected to advise the government on how to regulate the technology; the ministry has not explained how any future rule would be enforced (Euronews; Biometric Update).
Myrstad's warning stands regardless of what that group recommends: a facial-recognition ban would decide who can be identified, not whether someone can be filmed without ever knowing it (Straits Times/AFP).
For now, Norway's announced next step is the expert group. Until the government publishes its recommendations or a draft rule, the proposal remains limited to a possible restriction on facial-recognition functions, not a ban on camera-enabled smart glasses.
Comments
Be the first, drop a comment!