Why Smart Glasses Are Facing Restrictions at Schools, Pubs and Workplaces

Smart glasses can look like ordinary eyewear while capturing audio, photos or video, making it harder for people nearby to know when they are being recorded. Organizations are responding with different rules: some aim to protect private information or people’s privacy, while event organizers are also concerned about unauthorized copying of exhibitors’ work. 4

These measures are not one worldwide ban. They are separate policies set by an event organizer, a school, a state education department, a pub chain and a U.S. federal agency.

What restrictions have organizations introduced?

WorldGaming events: protect exhibitors’ intellectual property

WorldGaming, which organizes ICE and iGB Affiliate Barcelona, updated its Good Neighbour policy to prohibit Meta Glasses and other wearable recording devices at its events. The change followed exhibitor concerns about intellectual-property infringement and the unauthorized copying of features and designs.

Johnston Heights Secondary School: a school-level rule

Johnston Heights Secondary School in Surrey, British Columbia, says it does not allow smart glasses. If administrators see a student wearing them, they will take the glasses and contact the student’s parent or caregiver. The school cited privacy and academic-integrity concerns, including the possibility of people being photographed or recorded without their knowledge. 6

Western Australian public schools: a statewide instruction

A Western Australian Department of Education instruction takes effect on October 12, 2026. It bans smart glasses on government school premises and at school-organized events or activities. The instruction applies to students, staff, parents, carers, visitors and contractors. 12

JD Wetherspoon pubs: no recording customers or staff without permission

JD Wetherspoon’s policy is sometimes reported as a ban on smart glasses, but the distinction matters: reporting says the chain’s rule is against filming customers or employees without permission, and that customers should turn the glasses’ cameras off. The policy does not amount to a blanket ban on wearing the glasses.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: restrictions at work

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has prohibited employees from wearing Meta smart glasses on the job. The agency treats them as body-worn cameras and warned that they could unintentionally record or transmit sensitive information, potentially affecting privacy and legal protections.

Why the rules differ

A venue that hosts exhibitors may focus on protecting designs and other proprietary material. Schools may prioritize students’ privacy and academic integrity. A pub’s rule can address filming customers and staff, while a government agency may restrict personal recording devices in the workplace because of sensitive information. 6

The common concern is that camera-equipped eyewear can make recording less obvious to people nearby. But the response depends on the setting: these examples range from an event policy and an individual school rule to a statewide school instruction and workplace restrictions. They should not be mistaken for a single, general ban on smart glasses. 41