1010
Judge scolds Mark Zuckerberg's team for wearing Meta glasses to social media trial
(www.cbsnews.com)
Scolding without jailtime = slap on wrist.
this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2026
1010 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
82460 readers
3468 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
a small amount of jailtime is a slap on the wrist. A scolding is nothing.
I think even a small jailtime would be pretty serious. Provided he can't buy himself out. A fine would be a slap on the wrist*. A scolding is just that - something certain people have learned very early to ignore.
* depends on the amount of course
A demand for removal and threat of being held in contempt seems like the appropriate response to bringing a camera in, no matter who you are.
It does matter who they are!
The judge said not to bring something in and they clearly ignored the judge's directions and it is their job to comply with the judge's directions. They are not some random person off the street.
load more comments
(9 replies)
load more comments
(22 replies)
Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who is presiding over the trial, ordered anyone in the courtroom wearing AI glasses to immediately remove them, noting that any use of facial recognition technology to identify the jurors was banned.
"This is very serious," she said.
Holy shit.
Kudos to this judge for knowing their shit and acting on it. I love it.
I mean.... That's their job... But yes!
That’s their job
Is it though? In Donald's America?
Oh sorry... I guess I was projecting...
load more comments
(2 replies)
Each and every individual should have been arrested then and there. Imagine walking into a major criminal trial with a film camera on your shoulder.
Isn't it usual procedure that everyone else enters the courtroom and takes their places before the judge walks in? So the team would have had ample opportunity to film, record and facially-recognize the jury before Judge Kuhl made them take off the spyglasses.
The Judge also ordered them to dispose of anything they had already recorded.
No way of actually checking that they did delete anything, but the possibility of footage or photos being leaked by a disgruntled worker, etc would be a massive liability for those two idiots.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
noting that any use of facial recognition technology to identify the jurors was banned
For that reason alone, she should have held them in contempt and declared a mistrial before wasting anyone else's time.
Zuck and his crew should've been arrested on-site for such an egregious breach of privacy and mockery of the justice system. And the next set of jurors should've been immediately informed of why there was a mistrial, and the very obvious danger of the defendant having even one frame of video with a jurors face in it.
Instead, he got free viral marketing.
What a fucking clownshow.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's illegal to take photos and video in many courts, including all federal courts? Definitely one would need permission and can't do it surrepticiously.
This is a slap in the face to the judge, and the courts, to flout their rules as if they were above them. And they were above them apparently, they didn't get held in contempt.
There's no law anymore. These people have already gotten away with things much worse.
load more comments
(3 replies)
It's because they know that they ARE above the law. They've gotten away with things that would spell life in prison for you or I. They have the head of the America regime cozied up to. They were all at several dinner parties on Little St. James Island.
They know any contempt findings by the judge would be overturned by higher courts, or cancelled by the president as well, as long as they are up to date on their protection money and pay the deductible on their plan.
And they think the judge wouldn't dare in the first place, and would probably retaliate against the judge in secret ways if she did do something, and get away with it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Gee, maybe there might be some practical, social and legal problems with always recording camera glasses…
load more comments
(1 replies)
The sales of the glasses have been better than their VR headset which has really made them double down on the glasses as they see big potential. That said, I really think that it is a false hope as I suspect the market that is ok wearing Facebook glasses are small, but loyal.
These things should not be protected property. If you assault my privacy, I should be allowed to attack back.
load more comments
(15 replies)
load more comments
(45 replies)
This feels like gorilla marketing to me. They knew the judge would tell them to take them off and it would be just enough of a sensational story to make it to press. Now more people know that Meta has these glasses.
Edit: I'm not changing it. The responses to my mistake are too funny
Meta's glasses, retail for between $299 and $799, are equipped with a camera that can take photos and record video.
CBS is definitely involved in this gorilla scheme
Gorilla marketing, when you charge at someone and stop right before you fuck them up and then offer to sell them something.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
Good grief. This is such a goofy time to be alive
The return of the glassholes
Step one being "make the judge mad" is a bad idea.
Yea, he better watch out or he's gonna get a $6000 fine instead of $5000.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The fucking hubris. I’m so sick of it.
He put them in jail, right? RIGHT?
I always looked down on two party consent states, but now with the spyware glasses freaks? I'm less sure than ever.
I mean, I think I should be legally allowed to punch people in the face breaking the glasses just for wearing them, but this isn't a just world~
Social media platforms can now also offer witness intimidation/jury nullification services!
It's a feature.
That'll teach him.
Get ‘em, Judge!
Eww. CBS is linking to Free Press articles. What next ABC News and Epoch News?!?
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›