智能眼镜在印度引发严重隐私风波

印度正在大规模采用智能眼镜，包括Meta的Ray-Ban智能眼镜和Reliance Jio即将推出的产品，但这些隐形摄像装置已经引发严重的隐私侵犯事件。1Meta智能眼镜在印度的售价为420美元，而Reliance Jio计划今年推出售价低于105美元的竞争产品。1

一位跨性别创意工作者Shubnam在德里的抗议活动中被一名内容创作者用Meta智能眼镜秘密录制，该视频随后被剪辑成嘲笑性短视频在社交媒体传播，导致她遭受大量骚扰和虐待。1

隐私保护的漏洞日益凸显。Meta声称每副眼镜都配备了录制指示灯且"不能关闭"，但已有教程演示如何绕过该指示灯。1德里警察在6月学生教育改革抗议期间使用Meta智能眼镜录制示威者，据称进行了数周的持续监控。1前JNU学生会主席Aishe Ghosh向德里高等法院提交请愿书，声称警察威胁将示威者的视频发送给其家长和学校。1

此外，Meta内部原型眼镜包含能够持续拍摄和录音的人工智能功能，但不会激活外部录制指示灯。1印度现有法律主要针对更明显形式的骚扰（如偷拍他人脱衣或如厕），对在公共场所的秘密录制提供的保护有限。1

Smart glasses are fueling serious privacy violations across India as the devices proliferate among content creators and law enforcement. Meta's Ray-Ban smart glasses, priced at approximately $420, have become a tool for unauthorized recording, while Reliance Jio plans to launch a competing product for under $105 this year.1

The consequences for vulnerable individuals have been severe. A transgender creative worker named Shubnam was secretly recorded by a content creator using Meta smart glasses during a protest in Delhi; the footage was then edited into a mocking short-form video and shared on social media, triggering widespread harassment and abuse.1 In parallel, Delhi police deployed these devices to monitor student protesters during June demonstrations on education reform, conducting sustained recording operations over several weeks and allegedly threatening to send videos to the protesters' parents and schools, according to concerns raised by Aishe Ghosh, a former JNU student union president, in a petition filed to the Delhi High Court.1

The technology's built-in protections have proven inadequate. While Meta claims each device features a recording indicator light that "cannot be turned off," tutorials already exist demonstrating how to circumvent it.1 Additionally, Meta's internal prototype smart glasses contain AI capabilities for continuous image and audio capture without activating external recording indicators.1 India's existing legal framework offers limited protection against covert recording in public spaces, as statutes primarily target more explicit violations such as voyeurism.1