Unauthorized filming with VR headset: Meta Quest 3 misappropriated by first buyers

[Redaktion]

Meta Quest 3 is a new VR headset designed primarily for an immersive gaming experience, but is being utilized by early buyers in public spaces for very different purposes. The unusual use of Quest 3 suggests that Mark Zuckerberg's plan to make virtual reality headsets attractive to the masses may be working.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Unauthorized-filming-with-VR-headset-Meta-Quest-3-misappropriated-by-first-buyers.760591.0.html

[The Werewolf]

In North America, people have limited right to privacy in public places. In fact, you only have a full right to privacy in places where a reasonable person would expect it like in your own home.

In the case of a public business, the owner has the right to prohibit the use of cameras, but that's not a privacy issue, that's permitted use. If the business does not expressly notify a person that use of a camera is restricted, then the assumption that it is allowed is fair.

Drone owners have similar problems and this has been taken to court many times and the drone operators have consistently won the case.

Exceptions are if the recording or photos are used for commercial purposes - that requires a consent from the person in question, 'stalking' - when a photographer focuses on a single person excessively, and harassment which is similar to stalking but can involve continuing to record a specific person or group after being asked not to.

So in this specific case, the Quest user was not actually breaking any laws. The store owner could have asked the user to stop, but didn't which gave the user effective permission.

Sidenote: Swap out Quest 3 and replace it with smartphone. The laws are exactly the same. If you're ok with someone taking your picture with their phone in a cafe, even if it's a wide shot of the store, then you can't complain about the Quest user.