IFF backs challenge to Meta over Ray-Ban glasses: Who is liable when bystanders are recorded?

The legal challenge brought forth by the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) against Meta Platforms marks a pivotal moment for digital privacy and corporate accountability in India. The core of the argument revolves around whether a technology manufacturer, in this case, Meta, can be held directly responsible for the misuse of its products, specifically the Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses, when they are used to record individuals without their knowledge or consent. This notice seeks to establish a duty of care on Meta's part, moving beyond its traditional role as an intermediary platform.

Mr. X

The incident that triggered this legal action involved an individual identified as Mr. X, who was covertly recorded at a café in Delhi's Khan Market. The footage, captured by Ray-Ban Meta glasses, subsequently became a viral Instagram reel, garnering over 4.19 lakh views and numerous mocking comments. Mr. X's attempts to have the content removed through Instagram's reporting mechanisms were initially unsuccessful, with the platform stating the material did not breach its Community Standards. This highlights a significant gap in current platform policies regarding non-consensual recording and privacy violations, especially for individuals who are not direct users of the platform or device.

Section 79

A central aspect of the IFF's legal notice is its attempt to circumvent Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, which typically provides safe harbor to intermediaries like Meta for user-generated content. The notice argues that Meta's liability stems from its "own design and marketing choices in respect of a physical product," positioning the claim as independent of its intermediary role. This distinction is crucial, as it seeks to hold Meta accountable as a manufacturer with a duty of care towards those recorded by its device, rather than merely as a host of content. No Indian court has yet ruled on this interpretation, making the outcome potentially precedent-setting for tech product liability.

Ray-Ban Meta

The scrutiny surrounding Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses' covert recording capabilities is not new, with similar concerns and legal actions emerging globally. The device's small, easily missed recording LED is the primary safeguard for bystanders, a feature that critics argue is inadequate. Other jurisdictions, like Japan and South Korea, mandate an un-silencable shutter sound for cameras to ensure bystanders are aware of recording. Furthermore, a US lawsuit and a Swedish investigation have raised questions about Meta's handling of recorded footage, including allegations of contractors reviewing intimate recordings and footage from users' homes being sent to data annotators in Kenya. These global patterns underscore a broader debate about privacy, consent, and the ethical implications of wearable recording technology, with the Khan Market notice representing India's first significant legal challenge on this front.