Mark Zuckerberg appeared in a Los Angeles courtroom in a case accusing Instagram of designing features that attract children and encourage addictive use. Cameras were prohibited and mobile phones were removed from desks. A new concern emerged inside the courtroom: smart glasses capable of recording without notice.
Judge Carolyn Kuhl explicitly warned against the use of Meta Ray-Ban smart glasses in the courtroom. She stated that any unauthorized recording could result in contempt of court charges. The warning reflected the tension between traditional judicial procedures and artificial intelligence-enabled recording technology.
According to Forbes and CNBC, two members of Zuckerberg’s entourage were seen wearing the smart glasses. Devices intended to simplify capturing and sharing content became a legal and privacy concern in a restricted judicial setting.
The plaintiff, identified as Kylie, stated that she began using Instagram at age nine and developed excessive attachment to the platform during elementary school. This case is the first of more than 1,500 similar lawsuits that may reach the courts. It serves as a test of social media companies’ responsibility toward minors.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys presented internal slides from 2015 showing more than 4,000,000 users under the age of 13 in the United States. At that time, the platform did not require age verification. Age requirements were formally implemented in 2019. Zuckerberg attributed the delay to privacy concerns and stated that the company later adopted what he described as the correct policy.
When asked whether Instagram was designed to be addictive, Zuckerberg did not provide a definitive answer. The term addiction carries legal and psychological weight. Companies often prefer terms such as excessive use or problematic use.
Instagram head Adam Mosseri previously stated in an interview with BBC that 16 hours of use does not constitute addiction but rather problematic use.
The dispute extends beyond terminology. It involves algorithm design, notification systems, and infinite scrolling mechanisms, all of which influence user behavior, particularly among adolescents.
Meta stated that it has invested for years in parental controls, teen accounts, and integrated safety systems. The company also argued that the plaintiff’s psychological challenges predated her Instagram use and asserted that the jury must determine whether the platform was a substantial factor in worsening those issues.
The legal question centers on causation. It must be determined whether the presence of engagement-driven features is sufficient for liability, or whether a direct causal link between algorithms and psychological harm must be proven. The outcome could influence similar cases involving YouTube, TikTok, and Snap, some of which have opted for out-of-court settlements.
The courtroom episode reflects a broader shift. Wearable devices are no longer consumer accessories alone. Smart glasses equipped with small cameras and recording indicators may reshape privacy boundaries in both public and official settings.
Source: Business Insider