Meta faces class action lawsuit over AI smart glasses privacy

Meta is facing a new class action lawsuit—a lawsuit where a group of people with the same or similar injuries sue the defendant as a group—in the United States. Filed by plaintiffs Gina Bartone of New Jersey and Mateo Canu of California, who are represented by the Clarkson Law Firm, the legal action alleges that Meta violated privacy laws and engaged in false advertising regarding its artificial intelligence smart glasses. The suit also names Meta’s manufacturing partner Luxottica of America.

The legal complaint follows reports by Swedish newspapers that workers at a Kenya-based subcontractor are reviewing footage from customers’ glasses, which included sensitive content, like nudity, people having sex, and using the toilet. Although reports noted that Meta claimed it was blurring faces in images, sources disputed that this blurring consistently worked. The plaintiffs argue this contradicts Meta’s marketing campaigns, which advertised the devices as being built for your privacy and designed for privacy and controlled by the user. The complaint highlights promotional materials promising an added layer of security and stating that users are in control of their data and content, which did not lead customers to assume their footage was being watched by overseas workers.

The scale of the issue is significant, as over seven million people bought Meta’s smart glasses in 2025. The controversy has drawn the attention of the Information Commissioner’s Office, the U.K. data protection regulator, which is investigating the matter. Meta maintains that it uses contractors to review information to improve people’s experience with the glasses. In its policy document, Meta notes: “In some cases, Meta will review your interactions with AIs, including the content of your conversations with or messages to AIs, and this review may be automated or manual (human).” On Thursday morning, Meta spokesperson Christopher Sgro stated that media stays on the user’s device unless they choose to share it, and that the company uses contractors to review shared data to improve the user experience while taking steps to filter identifying information.

Why it matters

The lawsuit highlights a growing tension between the marketing of ‘privacy-first’ AI hardware and the operational reality of human data review, a practice that has drawn both legal and regulatory scrutiny.