Meta’s ‘pervert glasses’ released in New Zealand, just as the technology faces bans in Australia

Meta has released smart glasses in New Zealand today, with pairs co-branded with Oakley and Ray-Ban (both owned by Italian multinational EssilorLuxottica) – just as areas of Australia move to ban the so-called “pervert glasses”.

The companies said the launch marked the arrival of AI glasses in the NZ market, although some have already ordered earlier models from offshore and Kmart NZ has been selling a pair at a knockdown $99 (the retailer recently said it had sold out).

The line-up, for sale at retailers plus through Meta’s local AI glasses website, includes the Ray-Ban Meta Wayfarer (Gen3), which will sell from $809 and the Oakley Meta Vangard, priced from $989.

The new models have much less chunky frames and are much less obviously “smart” glasses than earlier models.

Both feature cameras in their frames that let the wearer capture high-resolution photos and video. A white LED light appears when they are recording. Pics can be captured hands-free with voice commands or via a button.

The release has come just days after the City of Sydney joined four other local Australian councils in banning the use of smart glasses in specific areas, including public pools, libraries and child care centres. The Australian Federal Government is considering an import ban. A ban inside government buildings is already in place.

And it comes just hours after Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg previewed new models at his company’s annual developer conference in New York – including one that is audio-only, with no camera in a nod to emerging privacy concerns.

On June 27, the Herald reported that an Auckland software engineer who pressed “record” on his Ray Ban Meta smart glasses without consent while a sex worker was naked in front of him, had been granted permanent name suppression.

He was granted a discharge without conviction.

“Smart glasses – otherwise known as pervert glasses – are hitting New Zealand, but as Australia announces moves to regulate this invasive technology, how can we ensure New Zealanders – especially women – are safe?” privacy expert Frith Tweedie said.

Oakley Meta Vanguard smartglasses, also released in New Zealand today.

Tweedie acknowledged that smart glasses – whose AI features can be used in concert with their cameras to give verbal descriptions of objects or read text – had benefits for those who were blind or had low vision.

“But there is also significant scope for misuse,” Tweedie said.

“Think covert, sexualised filming at gyms, beaches, schools and changing rooms, exposure of identities and locations online, stalking and image-based sexual abuse.”

The Crimes Act 1961, the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015 and the Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Act 2025 all provide some protection, Tweedie said.

"There is also significant scope for misuse. Think covert, sexualised filming at gyms, beaches, schools and changing rooms, exposure of identities and locations online, stalking and image-based sexual abuse” - privacy expert Frith Tweedie

“[But they all feature various limitations, including a focus on what an image shows and where it was captured rather than how footage may be sexualised through captions, targeting or online distribution.”

Tweedie told the Herald: “The risk of misuse of so-called smart glasses is already showing up overseas. The BBC has documented women being secretly filmed with Ray-Ban Meta glasses and having the footage posted online as ”dating advice" content.

“In one case, a woman’s phone number was visible in a video that attracted 1.3 million views, and she subsequently received many unwanted calls and messages.

“Internationally, various regulatory investigations are already underway. For example. Paris prosecutors are investigating complaints about women being filmed with smart glasses and the footage posted online.

“A German consumer advocacy group has filed a criminal complaint against Meta and other companies involved in selling the devices ​in Germany, citing privacy laws."

NZ ‘poorly prepared’

“New Zealand is poorly prepared for the misuse of smart glasses. The Privacy Act generally exempts filming for personal or domestic purposes unless the collection, use or disclosure would be ‘highly offensive’ to a reasonable person.

“But does that high threshold provide adequate protection?” she said.

“This is ambulance at the bottom of the cliff stuff.”

The Privacy Commissioner has limited powers to take action, Tweedie added.

“And unlike Australia, we don’t have an E-Safety Commissioner.

“So it’s clear that while there is extensive scope for misuse and abuse, New Zealand’s weak regulatory and enforcement frameworks are poorly equipped to prevent this harm occurring or to address it once it has occurred. And it’s women and girls who are most likely to be harmed.”

Privacy Commissioner concerns

Privacy Commissioner Michael Webster raised several concerns in an August 28 advisory about the new technology.

“Because they look like ordinary glasses or sunglasses, it’s very easy for people to be filmed covertly, which makes it harder for people being filmed to object to it,” Webster said.

“People using smart glasses to photograph or record people [in their personal capacity] need to respect the privacy of others. If you’re planning to film particular people, it’s good practice to ask those people if they consent before you start filming,” Webster wrote.

Most smart glasses have a light that flashes when the glasses are taking a photo or filming. But it’s not enough to expect people to look out for this light – you should still tell them that you’re recording.

“Individuals using smart glasses to collect other people’s information in a personal capacity will generally not be in breach of the Privacy Act,” Webster wrote.

“The Government may consider taking advice on the matter next parliamentary term," - Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith on smart glasses.

“That’s because there’s an exception in the Privacy Act that allows individuals to collect and use personal information for personal or domestic purposes, such as taking photos of other people to share with family and friends.

“However, the exception doesn’t apply if the information is collected, used or shared in a way that would be ‘highly offensive’.

An example of something meeting that threshold would be “information about people’s health or mental state is likely to be particularly sensitive, and particular care should be taken before filming children without the consent of them or their caregivers”.

Efforts to hide the filming, such as disabling the warning light, could also increase the offensiveness, Webster said.

The Privacy Commissioner said the legal framework covering smart glasses and other similar devices in New Zealand should be looked at.

His office would be “monitoring and doing further work on the issue, and engaging with other regulators and with policy-makers”.

The Herald has approached Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden for comment.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said: “The Government may consider taking advice on the matter next parliamentary term.”

Chris Keall is an Auckland-based member of the Herald’s business team. He joined the Herald in 2018 and is the technology editor and a senior business writer.