Norway's planned AI glasses ban makes bystander consent a question of place

Anyone heading out to an Equinor platform already has to leave their AI glasses ashore ^[15]. Norway's biggest company has banned them from its offices and offshore facilities, and schools in Oslo have bans of their own, according to Ars Technica ^[15]. The government now wants to do the same by law, for a limited time, across a far longer list of places ^[1][16].

"I am worried that new, powerful technology is being introduced where people risk being photographed, filmed or audio-recorded without knowing it," Torgeir Micaelsen, the digitalisation minister, said, as quoted by The Next Web ^[8]. A temporary ban "will give us time to conduct a thorough assessment and hold an informed debate that can lay the foundation for permanent regulation", he said, according to Ars Technica ^[11].

Here's what institutions actually did before any minister spoke: they stopped the glasses at the door. Several UK venues banned Meta's Ray-Bans, and New York barred smart glasses from its courtrooms ^[5]. Hans Anders, a Dutch eyewear chain, acted on sales instead. Last week it stopped selling Meta's Ray-Ban glasses in the Netherlands and Belgium ^[4]. Norway's plan follows the venues. The government said it is not planning a total ban: private use stays allowed, as does use where others are not at risk of being filmed without consent ^[9].

The place list falls into two groups. One is where crowds gather: parks, beaches, museums, shopping centres and public events ^[2]. The other is places for children, patients and people getting changed, including schools, kindergartens, playgrounds, youth clubs, doctors' offices and swimming pools ^[3][13]. Gyms make The Next Web's list only as "gyms with changing rooms" ^[3]. The trigger there is a room. Ars links the wider worry to filming without consent, including of children and of women in settings such as changing rooms ^[7]. Universities and colleges may yet be added ^[9].

The device side is less settled. Micaelsen's concern, in The Next Web's translation, covers being audio-recorded ^[8]. Two of the three device definitions the government is weighing name a camera, so glasses with a microphone and no camera would match the minister's worry and neither of those two definitions ^[17].

I think makers selling into Norway should treat location as an input to recording, and only for features that can capture someone besides the wearer. The cost is rework, because the bill has not yet reached parliament and an expert group has still to advise on lasting rules ^[6]. Two tests sort the features. The first is whether a feature can capture anyone other than the wearer. If it cannot, the exemption as the government described it applies wherever the glasses are used ^[9]. The second test applies only to features that can capture others, and asks whether the wearer is in a listed place. A listed place is what the bill targets ^[1]. An unlisted one is legal for now, and it is the case the expert group's lasting rules will have to settle ^[6].