ESPN Deportes¿Puede ser sancionado Cristiano según el reglamento?RTP DesportoEm ambiente conturbado. Portugal defronta Dinamarca após saída de Cristiano RonaldoESPNWhy Darnell Washington has become the Steelers' X factorThe Jerusalem PostIDF: 170 Hamas, PIJ terrorists killed in Gaza were misrepresented as 'innocent journalists'ColliderThe Fate of 'Reacher's First Spin-Off Has Officially Been DecidedThe Hollywood Reporter‘Reacher’ Spinoff ‘Neagley’ Renewed for Season 2 at Prime VideoDeadline‘Reacher’ Spinoff ‘Neagley’ Renewed For Season 2 At Amazon7sur7Les États-Unis durcissent à nouveau leur régime de sanctions contre l’IranSRF NewsKrieg in der Ukraine – Russische Drohnen treffen Schule und Südbrücke in KiewBBC NewsMan City not 'above the rules', says No 10 after backlash to Burnham remarksPremium TimesUnsettled by students’ poor performance, Akwa Ibom disputes report published by PREMIUM TIMESMintTaylor Swift’s former Beverly Hills home, where she wrote ‘1989’, is up for sale at nearly $8 million: See what’s inside
The Daily Newsstand · Free, Always
Thursday, October 1, 2026

Newsom vetoes smart glasses privacy bill

Translate

The law would have banned people from using wearables to secretly record others in private areas of businesses.

A pair of smart glasses with the legs folded.

Karissa Bell for Engadget

Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, has vetoed a bill that would have prohibited people from secretly record others using smart glasses in certain spaces. Those would have included changing rooms and doctors' offices, as the Associated Press notes.

In addition, SB-1130 would have forced the manufacturers of wearables to include an indicator that's on when the devices are recording video or audio (many already do). It would also have banned the sale of tech designed to mask a recording light or sound.

As Newsom put it, "this bill would make it a misdemeanor to operate a wearable recording device to capture sound or video of any other person in any area within a place of business where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy." He wrote in a letter to the State Senate that certain language used in the bill was too broad. "For example, the bill's definition of 'wearable recording device' could include certain smartwatches or other worn devices widely used in public spaces and capable of recording which could lead to significant confusion and unintended consequences," Newsom added.

As the governor pointed out, California already bans people from using an electronic device to record others in areas where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Like some other states, it has a two-party consent law that requires both participants of a conversation (including over the phone) to agree for it to be recorded. Still, more specific legal language could have helped deter people from violating others' privacy using smart glasses. There's a reason why many folks refer to these devices as "pervert glasses," after all.

TechNet, an advocacy group representing a litany of notable tech companies, opposed the law. Had it come into effect, someone found guilty of secretly recording others would have faced fines of up to $1,500 and/or a prison sentence. Companies making wearables without a recording indicator or tech designed to block such indicators would have faced fines of up to $2,500 per violation.

View the original on Engadget →

KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.