Judge warns smart glasses wearers of contempt charges as Zuckerberg testifies in Meta trial

[midian182]

What just happened? Mark Zuckerberg took the stand yesterday in a case that alleges Meta platforms such as Instagram and Facebook are purposely designed to be addictive to children. One of the first things the judge did was warn anyone wearing smart glasses that recording the proceedings would result in contempt of court charges.

The case, K.G.M. v. Meta et al., involves a 20-year-old Californian identified as Kaley who claims that years of using Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat as a child led to body dysmorphia, depression, and self-destructive thoughts. TikTok and Snap Inc., Snapchat's parent company, have already settled in the case

Yesterday was Zuckerberg's turn to take the stand. The Meta CEO was escorted into the building by a team of people, at least two of whom were wearing Meta Ray-Ban glasses.

It seems that Judge Carolyn Kuhl is not a fan of smart glasses' recording abilities. She warned that anyone who uses the recording feature in court will be held in contempt.

"If you have done that, you must delete that, or you will be held in contempt of the court," Judge Kuhl said.

Forbes notes that recording and photography are prohibited in California Superior Courtrooms. Anyone caught breaking this rule can be charged with contempt of court, face monetary sanctions, or be removed from a courtroom.

The privacy concerns surrounding smart glasses have become one the most controversial aspects of the devices as their popularity grows. While Meta's Ray-Ban glasses show a blinking LED when recording, they can be modified to hide the light.

In August 2025, a TikTok user described visiting a European Wax Center in Manhattan and discovering that her aesthetician was wearing Meta Ray-Bans. The worker claimed she hadn't charged the batteries, but the incident still left the TikToker shaken. The company later said employees keep the glasses turned off during appointments.

Returning to the Meta trial, Zuckerberg admitted that some people lie about their age when signing up for Instagram, which requires users to be 13 or older.

The plaintiff's lawyers presented internal documents from 2015 that showed over 4 million Instagram users in the US were under the age of 13. Instagram did not begin requiring birthdays at sign-up until late 2019. Kaley reportedly joined Instagram when she was 9 years old.

Zuckerberg said that before 2019, the reason Instagram didn't ask for user ages was related to concerns over privacy. The Associated Press reports that he never gave a direct answer when asked if Instagram was addictive.

Permalink to story:

Judge warns smart glasses wearers of contempt charges as Zuckerberg testifies in Meta trial

 

[ActualViking]

Just one way "smart glasses" or should I say the users of them is surveillance and privacy problem.

We have all come to term with everyone carrying recording devices in the form of smart phones, but there is a big difference between that and having people uses glasses that can record all the time. Right now it may not be that many people and the glasses don't have the battery life to be active all the time, but soon tech will make the glasses less noticeable and they'll be active all the time.

There needs to laws regulating and ideally prohibiting the use of such devices, otherwise we will soon be mapped and tracked every moment we are not alone.

 

[p51d007]

We the people are making it easier and easier to be tracked, recorded daily.
"smart" appliances, phones, doorbells, traffic cameras, connected vehicles.
But it's for YOUR convenience! Yeah right.

 

[daffy duck]

I wish we could just Ctrl-ALt-Delete all tech bro losers.

 

[Megalomaniac]

Smart Glasses are the final frontier.
But it won't be revolutionary till Apple does it.

 

[whateversa]

I call them 'creep glasses'. It's already bad enough with everyone being able to record you at any time with their phones - but at least those are more visible than creep glasses.

As for the person that suffered so much from the social media use - the foundation of the problem is psychological - that's why she used it so much and why she was so affected by it.. Why aren't psychologists also being held accountable for failing to treat her? Oh wait, they are mostly scammers too (in my experience), who keep making you come back for another appointment with zero progress.

 

[Loadedaxe]

I call them 'creep glasses'. It's already bad enough with everyone being able to record you at any time with their phones - but at least those are more visible than creep glasses.

As for the person that suffered so much from the social media use - the foundation of the problem is psychological - that's why she used it so much and why she was so affected by it.. Why aren't psychologists also being held accountable for failing to treat her? Oh wait, they are mostly scammers too (in my experience), who keep making you come back for another appointment with zero progress.

I believe the greater responsibility lies with the parents. A 9 year old child should not have unrestricted access to social media. Too often these days, parents treat a smartphone like a babysitter, without fully considering the potential risks and long term impact it can have on a child’s mental and emotional well being.

Accountability begins at home. Parents are the first line of protection for their children, and with that role comes the duty to supervise, guide, and set appropriate boundaries. While professionals certainly have ethical responsibilities, parents ultimately decide what their child is exposed to and when.

In situations like this, no amount of money can undo the harm that has already been done. What’s more important is recognizing where responsibility truly lies and ensuring that future children are better protected through more attentive parenting and oversight.

Being a parent is a privilege, not a right! Guidance falls directly on the parents!

 

[wiyosaya]

Too bad the Judge didn't jail Zuckerberg there and then. Zuckerberg deserves it, IMO.

 

[jeffbert]

As I said earlier in other topics, privacy is a thing of the past. So, let's take the leap to universal nudism! That way we will not worry about being seen in the buff.

 

[OortCloud]

There won't be a country is Europe that hasn't banned social media from schools and from all under 15's or 16's in a year,

 

[JSabin]

Zuckerberg is as big a chump as the 20-year old filing the complaint. America has become "whiner central."

 

[imdarkbreeze]

There needs to laws regulating and ideally prohibiting the use of such devices, otherwise we will soon be mapped and tracked every moment we are not alone.

Seriously? You think we aren't already? Doorbell cameras. Cameras on every commercial and retail building. Cameras at EVERY intersection in most towns and cities. Cameras in front and rear of MOST cars. Cameras ON people AND in their hands. Cameras in your house, on your computers, in your smart devices.

Where is it you think you can't be tracked or watched at these days besides inside your home IF you have no devices that are capable of it? And a lot of people have devices that they have no idea are listening, watching and recording them without their knowledge. And believe me, they have devices that can watch and record your activities inside your home, from outside your home, as well.

 

[takemaru]

"The Associated Press reports that he never gave a direct answer when asked if Instagram was addictive"

That's a one way of phrasing the question, if their service is useful and entertaining.

 

[GoldenGoat]

Chances are, they are always recording. They are probably only giving the user the video if they are "on" though.