Kmart’s $89 glasses can record what you see. But what happens next?

Kmart recently launched a new accessory — dubbed Camera Glasses — which it said blends stylish eyewear with built-in camera technology.

At a glance, the black-framed spectacles from Kmart's in-house brand Anko look like any ordinary pair of glasses. But by Monday 3 August, there were reports the product was sold out online.

At $89, the glasses provide a low-cost alternative to the smart glasses designed by glasses company Ray-Ban and Facebook owners Meta, which start at $337. The latest generation of this technology costs more than $700.

A recent promotional video for Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses, featuring celebrity Kylie Jenner, showcased its features. Those include an ultra-HD camera, discreet open-ear Bluetooth speakers, and translation technology.

In July, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said people who don't wear smart glasses in the future will be at a "pretty significant cognitive disadvantage".

There are similar products available or in development by the companies Samsung, Rokid, Even Realities, Solos and XREAL.

Milica Stilinovic is a postdoctoral research associate for the Governing Immersive Tech Project at the University of Sydney. She told SBS News that "a lot of flak has been driven towards Meta currently because they are market leaders".

But she said: "If the price is cheaper ... if you're not paying at the bridge, you may pay at the toll.

"We still need to ask ourselves, this data that we're essentially generating for these companies; how is it being handled, by whom and at what cost?"

Stilinovic also said wearable technology, regardless of its price point, raises complex questions around privacy and security.

'Computers for your face'

Put simply, Stilinovic said smart glasses are "computers for your face".

Depending on the product, they may have AI-enabled programs embedded, which analyse human behaviours including eye movements, head tracking and voice patterns.

"They are picking up data of where you're walking around, the space that you're in, what you're doing at particular times ... even to the extent of knowing the map out of your home," Stilinovic said.

Facial recognition technology is not active in most smart glasses on the market.

However, in 2024, students from Harvard University combined smart glasses, facial search engines, AI language tools and public databases to test surveillance capabilities. They found information including a person's home address, name and phone number — just by looking at them.

Fareed Kaviani is a research fellow at the Emerging Technologies Research Lab at Monash University. In 2024, he co-authored a paper examining social perceptions of smart glasses use in Australia.

Of more than 1,000 Australians surveyed, 13.5 per cent of smart glasses owners admitted to dangerous usage like wearing the technology while driving or cycling. Around 17 per cent of people admitted to prohibited use, including antisocial behaviour or recording people without consent.

Kaviani told SBS News this research was conducted in 2022, "when the device was not as well known and ubiquitous as it probably is today".

He also said his research relied on self-reported data: "The real prevalence of dangerous or prohibitive use is difficult to establish. It could be higher, it could be lower."

He found that younger people in Australia were more likely to own the glasses, but age safeguards around the technology were not always clear.

What does the law say?

Avinash Singh, principal lawyer at Astor Legal, told SBS News he believes most people have "no clue" about the laws regarding cameras or smart glasses.

The Australian Privacy Principles, which govern standards, rights and obligations around the collection and use of personal information, are considered "technology-neutral" and can adapt to changing technologies, according to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner.

This means smart glasses are governed at state and territory levels.

In Australia, it is a criminal offence to film a person in a private or intimate circumstance like a bathroom or change room without consent.

Singh prefaced that "private conversations don't necessarily have to be in a private space".

"They can just be two people or more than two people speaking in public. But, if there's an inference that the people having that conversation would expect that to remain a private conversation — that will satisfy the definition."

He also told SBS News that in most parts of Australia, if a person is recording in public using smart glasses without informing people they're filming, "they would be committing an offence".

Queensland is an exception. People can record a conversation without the other party knowing as long as they are a participant in the conversation.

If an offence is committed, Singh said individuals, not companies, will be responsible.

"In the same way as if someone went out, took a hammer and committed an assault, the manufacturer of the hammer would not be held responsible."

'Murkier waters'

If a person uses wearable technology to repeatedly target or intimidate a person, the user may breach stalking and harassment laws.

Additional legal issues can also arise when recordings are shared publicly online, including doxing and online misuse.

Singh believes that Australian privacy laws were drafted when there was no anticipation this technology would become prominent:

"The current legal framework never envisioned that you would be able to wear a pair of glasses and record people without them knowing what was happening," he said.

"I think more significant for a lot of people is ... sharing it online and people effectively making a commercial gain from criminal offences."

Stilinovic has also analysed social media videos captured using smart glasses. She found recordings ranged from advertorial content to the "murkier waters of pickup artists" which often form part of the online manosphere.

She believes state laws can be "fragmented" and called for additional enforcement.

"For too long, we're dealing with a situation in which technology is unleashed onto society, and we don't have the guardrails in place. Then, the harm happens, and then regulators have to scramble to try to protect us from that harm."

For the latest from SBS News, download our app and subscribe to our newsletter.