More than 70 individuals have filed a proposed class-action lawsuit against Meta, alleging that the company’s smart glasses unlawfully shared intimate images without consent. The plaintiffs, comprising buyers, users, and people recorded by the device, claim that sensitive footage was accessed by overseas contractors tasked with reviewing and labeling content for Meta’s artificial intelligence training.

The lawsuit, amended in late August and spanning 230 pages, was filed in a federal court in Northern California. It accuses Meta of fraud, false advertising, and violations of consumer protection laws across multiple states. According to the complaint, contractors based in Kenya viewed videos and images recorded by the glasses, some of which captured private moments such as people undressing, using the bathroom, engaging in sexual activity, and entering passwords.

One plaintiff, identified only as PL18, alleges that his smart glasses began recording without his knowledge while sitting on a bathroom counter. The lawsuit states that photographs appearing in his gallery included family members in the bathroom and bathing—images that no one intended to record. The allegations highlight growing concerns over the privacy implications of Meta’s wearable technology.

Meta markets its smart glasses as multifunctional devices designed to enable users to listen to audio, make phone calls, record video, and interact with an AI assistant without needing a smartphone. The company has used celebrity endorsements, including by Kylie Jenner, to promote the eyewear. The glasses feature a built-in light intended to signal when recording is in progress, a privacy safeguard Meta says helps protect users.

Despite these measures, public backlash has intensified, with some critics referring to the device dismissively as “pervert glasses.” Privacy advocates and plaintiffs argue that the technology’s design and the handling of recorded content raise serious ethical and legal issues.

Meta has responded to the lawsuit by rejecting the claims and signaling its intention to vigorously contest the allegations in court. The case reflects a broader debate over privacy rights, data security, and the responsibilities of technology companies as they develop new AI-powered devices.