Published: 15 October 2026
The Dutch consumer association Consumentenbond said on 15 October that it is taking Meta to court over its AI camera glasses, with a hearing at the Amsterdam District Court on 26 November. It wants Meta to change the glasses and their default settings to meet privacy law. It also wants Meta to stop what it calls the unlawful use of the data for AI training. If Meta says the glasses cannot comply, the Consumentenbond wants a ban on their sale in the Netherlands.
The Consumentenbond says bystanders are filmed without noticing
Meta’s glasses, made with Ray-Ban and Oakley, have a small camera in the frame and a light that shows when it records. In a demand letter on 29 September, the Consumentenbond said that light is not visible enough and can be covered. People around the wearer, children included, can be filmed without knowing it.
The association also points to what the footage can show. Images can reveal someone’s political views, religion or health. Under the AVG, the Dutch name for the GDPR, these are special categories of personal data that may only be processed under strict conditions. It adds that Meta can use the images and sound to train its AI models.
Meta got two weeks to respond to the letter and refused to adjust the glasses, according to the Consumentenbond. If the court agrees with the association, Meta would have two weeks to make the changes. Should it come to a ban, the Consumentenbond wants an exception for blind and visually impaired people with a medical need. Glasses that describe their surroundings can help them.
Meta points to the warning light and a new opt-out for AI training
Meta has not published a response to the lawsuit. On 12 October, Alex Himel, who leads Meta’s wearables business, told Dutch journalists that Meta has no plans to take the glasses off the market, Villamedia reported. He compared the outcry to the arrival of the first phones with cameras. Cybernews reported that he called attempts to disable the warning light a cat-and-mouse game.
Meta told the Belgian broadcaster VRT that recent models switch off the camera when the light is covered. It also said ordinary photos and videos stay on the glasses first, instead of going straight to Meta. In September, Meta added a setting that stops images from Meta AI conversations being used for training, Engadget reported. Voice interactions are still used for training. The report did not say whether the new setting is on by default or whether it applies in the EU.
Are Meta’s camera glasses still on sale in the Netherlands?
Yes, Meta still sells them, but fewer shops do. Optician chain Hans Anders stopped selling them in the Netherlands and Belgium on 2 October for an indefinite period, and Wehkamp had already removed them, VRT reported. Venues set their own rules too: TivoliVredenburg in Utrecht has banned camera glasses, NOS reported.
The Consumentenbond is not the only party in court. Offlimits, the Dutch centre on online sexual abuse, also wants the glasses off the market. With the journalism platform The Firewall, it asked for summary proceedings on 13 October, Villamedia reported.
Employers can set rules for camera glasses before the ruling
The court case is about Meta’s design and default settings. It does not change what already applies when someone wears the glasses at work. The AVG has an exception for purely private use, but recordings made on the job fall outside it. A camera in a client meeting, a care setting or an HR conversation can capture exactly the sensitive data the Consumentenbond warns about.
For the organisations DataNorth works with, this is a familiar question. It comes up with every AI tool that sees or hears more than its user: what leaves the building, and who may use it? Three steps make sense now.
- Decide where camera glasses are not welcome, such as client meetings, HR conversations, care settings and rooms where screens show customer data. Add this to the rules you already have for phones and cameras.
- If a team wants smart glasses for work, for example hands-free instructions for field engineers, treat them like any new camera system. Run a DPIA (a formal privacy risk check) first and decide which AI features stay off.
- Tell staff and visitors the rules in advance, so nobody has to raise it on the spot.
A ruling against Meta would change the product or take it off Dutch shelves. It would not write your house rules, and those can start today.
For more information, visit the official announcement of the lawsuit against Meta on the Consumentenbond website.
