[dead]
Jurors?
[dead]
Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
141–150 of 226 posts
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#142The vibe around smart glasses is so weird: Governments and businesses can record in public, which is right and proper, but if an individual person records what they see, that's wrong and creepy.
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#143My dad wears smart glasses because he's nearly deaf and the classes show captions for the person he's talking to. They're great. He doesn't use or care at all about the camera. Having the captions would be very useful to him in a courtroom setting. Collateral damage I guess.
There are glasses that do only captions, no recording or camera. The article says "any eyewear with video and audio recording capability" which makes sense. Although even that is unreasonably specific and should just say "recording or transmission device" to ban the activity and not the item.
Pretty sure any device which subtitles audio could be used to record that audio.
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#144I would think that most people in a courtroom (defendants, jurors, lawyers, members of the public) would be prohibitied from filming most court proceedings with any sort of audio/video recording device. So this "ban" is really just a clarification.
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#145The vibe around smart glasses is so weird: Governments and businesses can record in public, which is right and proper, but if an individual person records what they see, that's wrong and creepy.
[dead]
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#146My dad wears smart glasses because he's nearly deaf and the classes show captions for the person he's talking to. They're great. He doesn't use or care at all about the camera. Having the captions would be very useful to him in a courtroom setting. Collateral damage I guess.
This is a courthouse. Judges still have king-like powers in their rooms. Anyone with a real problem will certainly be able to request and be granted an exemption.
That said, get caught misusing such an exemption and you will be hauled in for direct contempt. No big trial. No witnesses. Just the judge ordering you into 30 days custody.
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#147My dad wears smart glasses because he's nearly deaf and the classes show captions for the person he's talking to. They're great. He doesn't use or care at all about the camera. Having the captions would be very useful to him in a courtroom setting. Collateral damage I guess.
This is a courthouse. Judges still have king-like powers in their rooms. Anyone with a real problem will certainly be able to request and be granted an exemption. That said, get caught misusing such an exemption and you will be hauled in for direct contempt. No big trial. No witnesses. Just the judge ordering you into 30 days custody.
Courts also tend to have existing accessibility setups for these scenarios.
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#148My dad wears smart glasses because he's nearly deaf and the classes show captions for the person he's talking to. They're great. He doesn't use or care at all about the camera. Having the captions would be very useful to him in a courtroom setting. Collateral damage I guess.
Wow that's amazing. Which glasses can do this?
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#149My dad wears smart glasses because he's nearly deaf and the classes show captions for the person he's talking to. They're great. He doesn't use or care at all about the camera. Having the captions would be very useful to him in a courtroom setting. Collateral damage I guess.
He can apply to the court for special permission - and probably use ADA to guide permission
Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week
#150My dad wears smart glasses because he's nearly deaf and the classes show captions for the person he's talking to. They're great. He doesn't use or care at all about the camera. Having the captions would be very useful to him in a courtroom setting. Collateral damage I guess.
Putting aside that judges can make exceptions when circumstances warrant, one would think that this function (providing live captioning of the proceedings) would be a reasonable accommodation that courts should be able to provide. Especially now that every courtroom is (or can be) equipped for sound and video to support remote operation, it shouldn't be too difficult to support a display with the captioning via the court IT system and alleviate any concerns about surreptitious recording.