CONFIDENTIAL • PROFESSIONAL • LOUISIANA 985-262-1299 Confidential Consultations 110 Green Street, Thibodaux, LA 70301
Start an Investigation

Smart Glasses, Secret Recordings and Louisiana’s New Privacy Law: What Investigative Clients Should Know

DLI Investigative Brief

Publication date: September 28, 2026
Estimated reading time: 7 minutes
Category: Louisiana Investigations, Surveillance & Privacy

Short summary: Louisiana now has a law specifically addressing the use of wearable eyeglass recording devices during certain direct conversations. The law reflects a larger challenge facing attorneys, businesses, investigators, insurers and private citizens: recording technology is becoming increasingly discreet, while the legal and evidentiary questions surrounding its use are becoming more important. Understanding what a recording actually establishes—and whether it was appropriately obtained—matters before relying upon it in an investigation.

The Camera May No Longer Look Like a Camera

For decades, people generally knew what a recording device looked like.

A video camera was obvious. A handheld recorder was recognizable. Even a smartphone being pointed toward someone usually provides some indication that recording may be taking place.

Wearable technology is changing that.

Modern smart glasses can incorporate cameras, microphones and transcription technology into eyewear that can resemble ordinary glasses.

That creates useful applications, but it also creates obvious privacy questions.

When does someone reasonably expect that a conversation is not being recorded?

Does a person need to tell others that smart glasses are recording?

Does it matter whether the conversation occurs in public, at work, inside a residence or during an investigation?

And what happens when a recording becomes evidence in litigation or another dispute?

Louisiana lawmakers addressed some of those questions this year.

Louisiana Act 965 Took Effect August 1

During the 2026 Regular Session, the Louisiana Legislature passed House Bill 410. It became Act 965 without the governor’s signature on June 25 and took effect August 1, 2026.

The new law is codified principally at Louisiana Revised Statutes 9:2790.1 through 9:2790.4.

At its core, R.S. 9:2790.3 provides that a participant in a qualifying direct conversation generally may not intentionally use a wearable eyeglass recording device to video and record or transcribe that conversation unless all participants are specifically notified.

That sounds simple.

The actual law is considerably more detailed.

Notification Is Not the Same as a Universal Ban

One of the most important points is what the law does not say.

Act 965 does not simply make smart-glasses recording illegal throughout Louisiana.

Nor does it establish a blanket rule covering every camera, every recording device or every conversation.

The Louisiana Legislature created a specific framework for wearable eyeglass recording devices and included numerous exceptions. The statute also expressly states that it does not limit, modify, expand or supersede Louisiana’s existing Electronic Surveillance Act.

That distinction is important because a person should not assume that the rules governing smart glasses automatically determine whether some other type of audio or video recording is lawful.

The Law Contains Important Exceptions

Act 965 identifies a number of circumstances to which its notification provision does not apply.

Among those listed in the statute are certain:

The law also contains an exception concerning recordings of a conversation when the person recording or transcribing it is not a participant.

Those exceptions are significant, but they should not be interpreted as a general authorization to record whenever one believes an exception might apply. Other Louisiana or federal laws, property rights, court orders, confidentiality obligations or other legal considerations may still matter.

For investigative clients, the practical lesson is simple:

The legality of a recording can depend heavily on the particular facts.

Public Background Capture Is Treated Differently

The statute also addresses something smart glasses are particularly likely to capture: people who happen to be nearby.

Act 965 states that the chapter does not apply to incidental, unintended or background capture of people or conversations occurring in public places when the recording is not specifically directed at those individuals.

That distinction recognizes the practical reality of wearable cameras.

Someone walking through a public area while wearing recording glasses could incidentally capture numerous people who were never the intended subjects of the recording.

That is different from intentionally directing the device toward particular participants in a qualifying direct conversation.

Louisiana’s Existing Electronic-Surveillance Law Still Matters

Act 965 should not be confused with Louisiana’s broader Electronic Surveillance Act.

Louisiana Revised Statutes 15:1303 generally prohibits the willful interception of wire, electronic or oral communications except where the law provides otherwise. The statute contains several exceptions and circumstances in which interception is permitted.

Most importantly for understanding Act 965, the Legislature expressly stated that the new smart-glasses provisions do not limit, modify, expand or supersede that existing law.

In other words, determining whether a recording is permissible may require looking beyond the fact that the device happens to be a pair of smart glasses.

This article is informational and is not legal advice. Anyone facing a specific recording-law question should consult qualified counsel regarding the particular circumstances.

Why This Matters to Attorneys

For attorneys, wearable recording technology creates at least two separate questions.

The first is:

Was the recording obtained appropriately?

The second is:

What does the recording actually prove?

Those are not the same question.

A recording may capture only part of a conversation. It may begin after an important statement was made. It may lack context. The identity of speakers may require confirmation. The date, time or location may need verification.

And if litigation is anticipated, preservation of the original file may become important.

Investigative work surrounding a recording can therefore involve more than simply watching or listening to it.

The surrounding facts may matter just as much.

Insurance and Claims Investigations Face Similar Questions

Audio and video recordings can become relevant to insurance and claims matters as well.

A recording might appear to contradict a statement, document an event, establish that a vehicle was present, or capture physical activity.

But investigators and claims professionals should be careful not to make the recording establish more than it actually shows.

For example, a brief video depicting a person’s activity at one moment does not automatically establish that person’s condition throughout an entire day.

Likewise, a recording showing a vehicle at a location does not necessarily establish who drove it there.

Objective investigation requires context and corroboration.

Businesses Need Policies for Wearable Recording Technology

Act 965 is also relevant to Louisiana businesses because smart glasses may increasingly appear in workplaces, meetings and customer interactions.

The statute specifically contains exceptions involving recordings or transcriptions made by participants in their own places of business or employment.

That statutory exception should not be confused with a recommendation that businesses permit unrestricted wearable recording.

Organizations may still have legitimate reasons to establish policies concerning:

Businesses considering such policies should obtain appropriate legal guidance because workplace rights, employment law, confidentiality obligations and the circumstances of a particular recording can all matter.

The Technology Is Already Raising National Concerns

Louisiana’s legislation arrives as smart-glasses privacy concerns are expanding nationally.

Recent reporting describes law-enforcement agencies warning personnel that smart glasses can resemble ordinary eyewear while recording audio and video. Some agencies have expressed concern about their use inside secure facilities and other sensitive environments.

The underlying issue extends beyond any particular brand of glasses.

Recording devices are becoming smaller, less conspicuous and more integrated into everyday objects.

That means investigators, attorneys, businesses and individuals increasingly need to think about privacy and evidence based on what technology can actually do—not simply what a traditional camera looks like.

A Recording Is Evidence, Not Necessarily the Entire Story

A recording can be extraordinarily valuable.

It can also be incomplete.

Consider a 30-second video from a ten-minute interaction.

The video may accurately show everything occurring during those 30 seconds while providing no information about the preceding nine minutes.

That does not make the recording unreliable.

It means its significance should be evaluated in context.

A professional investigation may therefore ask:

Where did the recording originate?

Is the original file available?

Who created it?

When was it made?

Does additional video exist?

Can the speakers or individuals be independently identified?

Do witnesses or other records corroborate what appears in the recording?

Those questions become more important—not less—as recording technology becomes ubiquitous.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did Louisiana make smart glasses illegal?

No. Act 965 does not prohibit ownership or general use of smart glasses. It creates a notification requirement for certain intentional recordings or transcriptions of direct conversations using wearable eyeglass recording devices and contains numerous exceptions.

Does everyone have to consent before a qualifying conversation is recorded with smart glasses?

The language of Act 965 says that participants must be specifically notified in circumstances covered by the law. The statute uses notification language rather than establishing a universal affirmative-consent requirement. It also contains multiple exceptions.

Does the new law apply to ordinary smartphones?

Act 965 specifically addresses wearable eyeglass recording devices. It does not replace Louisiana’s other laws governing recording and interception of communications.

What if smart glasses accidentally capture someone walking by in public?

The statute expressly excludes incidental, unintended or background capture of individuals or conversations in public places when the recording is not specifically directed at them.

Does Act 965 contain an exception for preserving evidence?

Yes. Among its exceptions are qualifying recordings or transcriptions made for purposes of preserving evidence related to an actual or anticipated civil or administrative proceeding and those related to a criminal act or proceeding. The application of an exception to a particular situation is a legal question that should be evaluated based on the facts.

Does a legally obtained recording automatically prove what happened?

No. Legality and evidentiary significance are different issues. A recording may still require authentication, identification, context, preservation and corroboration depending upon the matter.

The Bottom Line

Louisiana’s new smart-glasses law illustrates how quickly investigative technology is changing.

The devices may be new.

The fundamental investigative questions are not.

What happened?

Who was involved?

What does the evidence actually establish?

Can it be independently corroborated?

And was the information obtained and preserved appropriately?

For attorneys, insurers, businesses, government entities and private clients, increasingly sophisticated recording technology makes those questions more important than ever.

Technology can capture a moment. Careful investigation establishes the context.

Related DLI Services

Need Reliable Facts and Professional Investigative Support?

Dugas Legal Investigations assists attorneys and law firms, insurance and claims professionals, businesses, government entities and private clients with investigative matters throughout Louisiana and southern Mississippi.

Discuss Your Case Confidentially
985-262-1299
LASPY.com

This article is provided for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. Questions concerning recording laws, privacy, admissibility or evidence preservation should be directed to qualified legal counsel.

Sources

Start With a Confidential Conversation.

Tell us what you need to establish, document, locate, verify, investigate, or serve.

Start an Investigation → Submit Process Service → Call 985-262-1299
Start an Investigation →