{"id":141396,"date":"2026-01-09T14:42:08","date_gmt":"2026-01-09T22:42:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/01\/09\/are-we-prepared-to-deal-with-the-coming-wearable-revolution\/"},"modified":"2026-01-09T14:42:08","modified_gmt":"2026-01-09T22:42:08","slug":"are-we-prepared-to-deal-with-the-coming-wearable-revolution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/01\/09\/are-we-prepared-to-deal-with-the-coming-wearable-revolution\/","title":{"rendered":"Are We Prepared To Deal With The Coming Wearable Revolution?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The buzz this year at CES<\/a> isn\u2019t just agentic AI. It\u2019s also wearables and their coming power and use. And as with agentic AI, these wearables could have significant implications and pose challenges for legal.<\/p>\n

The Rise of Wearables<\/strong><\/p>\n

When we talk about wearables, we are talking about things like glasses, watches, and necklaces that are not only fashion pieces, but which can actually do things. While the notion of wearing something like a smart watch that can do things like show your emails, enable your smart devices to do things, or track your heart rate has been around for a while, the difference now is that these wearables can combine with AI, agentic AI, virtual reality, and augmented reality to do much more.<\/p>\n

A simple such wearable is the Meta glasses<\/a>. These glasses can read your text messages and allow you to take a video or picture with a touch of the temple. But you can also verbally ask the glasses questions like \u201cwhat am I looking at?\u201d or \u201ctell me about this painting I am seeing in the museum.\u201d By combining with AI, the glasses can whisper an answer in your ear which no one else can hear.<\/p>\n

And that\u2019s just the beginning. I attended a panel discussion in which Resh Sidhu<\/a>, the Senior Director of Innovation of Snap Inc.<\/a>, talked about what her company is developing. Snap is the company behind the social media tool Snapchat<\/a>. Snapchat introduced the first glasses wearable back in 2016 and has been working on them ever since. Sidhu showed a short video of how future versions of Snapchat glasses could combine with AR, VR, and AI to do amazing things, like line her up for a perfect 3 pointer in a pickup basketball game. Or be her companion on a trip to Paris like an experienced tour guide.<\/p>\n

At the Lenovo<\/a> keynote, the presenters talked about a wearable necklace that could do similar things. It\u2019s still a proof in concept but the direction is clear. Several presenters in several contexts talked about AI wearables that \u201csee what you see and hear what you hear\u201d and can respond to your needs.<\/p>\n

The advantage, of course, is that these wearables allow the wearer to \u201cdo things in the moment without reaching out to a screen that pulls us away,\u201d according to Sidhu.<\/p>\n

These wearables have tremendous potential. They can increase safety. They can be training guides. They can provide useful information and understanding of complex issues. They can always be on awaiting you to say \u201chey Meta,\u201d or whatever the command should be (don\u2019t worry, \u201chey Siri\u201d still won\u2019t get you very far).<\/p>\n

Advantages for Lawyers<\/strong><\/p>\n

For lawyers, it\u2019s easy to see some advantages. Think about taking a deposition where your glasses suggest questions and follow up while you are looking at the witness for body language instead of your screen.<\/p>\n

Or one of things that used to bedevil me as a young lawyer in a courtroom: your glasses can tell you, \u201cHey, object, hearsay.\u201d And tell you why. Or supply you information to answer your client\u2019s questions in an in-person meeting. Or combine with other tools to explain what your opponent is doing when he makes certain arguments to a judge or takes a position. Or help you deal with and understand what a mediator is doing in a mediation.<\/p>\n

Lots of benefits. But also, some real issues and therein lies the challenges to legal.<\/p>\n

Legal Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n

These high-powered wearables raise some interesting issues. I wrote recently<\/a> about an AI proctor that detects if a witness is using AI in a remote interview in large part by determining if the person is looking at a screen. Good idea. But what happens if the person doesn\u2019t need a screen to get the AI answer? It\u2019s provided through the witness\u2019s glasses. \u00a0<\/p>\n

Suppose a witness takes the stand to testify wearing glasses. How do we know that they aren\u2019t being fed the answers by a bot? \u00a0Do we demand that the glasses be examined? I\u2019m not sure our courts are ready for that.<\/p>\n

The Bot is Lying<\/strong><\/p>\n

And what happens if the advice the bot gives is wrong and someone acts on it. Most of us know that LLMs make mistakes and hallucinate regularly. It\u2019s one thing when it provides the output on a screen, it\u2019s another when it provides the output in the moment, in your ear. We have enough problems with people acting in the spur of the moment with screen output; the temptation to run with an output whispered in your ear is far more.<\/p>\n

Privacy Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are privacy issues as well. All these devices are creating data. Where does it go? Who has access? Will it be discoverable? Imagine your client getting a discovery demand for everything their glasses created and kept. We have enough trouble with clients creating evidentiary trails when they type in inputs \u2014 wearables will increase the problems multifold.<\/p>\n

And it\u2019s not just your privacy that\u2019s at stake. I have a pair of first-generation Meta glasses. I can take a picture or video that those around me would scarcely detect, violating their privacy.<\/p>\n

The Impact on Dispute Resolution<\/strong><\/p>\n

Certainly, that kind of world would eliminate a lot of \u201che said, she said\u201d disputes if there is data someplace that would clarify it, much like police body cams often tell the real story, provided they are turned on. These kinds of disputes are often difficult to litigate since they often turn on who the fact finder finds more credible and that can hinge on a variety of the unpredictable factors.<\/p>\n

But even in those kinds of disputes, our litigation system is designed to make determinations about who is telling the truth based on a totality of facts and testimony about interactions between people. But AI wearables could easily turn the totality of facts that explain behavior into a sound bite.<\/p>\n

And what would that kind of world be where you have to think about everything you say or do? Can you imagine the posturing and games that would be played? Set ups, where one party employs an orchestrating letter or statement designed to provoke a reaction are already pretty common. It\u2019s a gamesmanship tactic I\u2019ve seen used over and over again by both lawyers and clients. Wearables increase the opportunity and temptation to do just that.<\/p>\n

A Lack of Guardrails<\/strong><\/p>\n

Right now, there are few rules or guardrails in place except for those the vendors may provide out of the goodness of their hearts. The only law is the notion that there must be consent for a conversation to be recorded. While a few states require both parties\u2019 consent, most states only require that one person consent, rendering the rule moot to begin with.<\/p>\n

Do we need to require those with AI wearables to disclose that fact when interacting with others? Isn\u2019t there an inherent disadvantage in substantive interactions where one person has access to AI and can create a record and the other doesn\u2019t?<\/p>\n

And don\u2019t forget, there is still the issue of deepfakes. Outputs from AI wearables could easily be manipulated to make what happened look a lot different than what really did.<\/p>\n

Our Responsibility<\/strong><\/p>\n

It\u2019s often said to whom much is given, much is expected. The concept applies here. Wearables offer tremendous potential benefits across a broad spectrum of life. But with those benefits comes our responsibility as lawyers and legal professionals to think hard about the issues and risks these wearables bring to the legal process and to dispute resolutions.<\/p>\n

We have already seen the result of a lack of planning and thinking about the risks of evidence manipulation that deepfakes have brought. Courts and litigants unprepared to deal with those scenarios and questions. A lack of rules and guidance. A threat to our system.<\/p>\n

Without planning and forethought, we could end up in the same place with wearable issues. Legal has not only been slow to embrace technology, it\u2019s also been slow to understand the risks technology brings to things like the rule of law and fundamental fairness.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s been said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. The time is now to think about how to manage the risks to legal while appreciating the benefits and use of these tools by society. Otherwise, we will be facing the same crisis with wearables as we are with deepfakes: scrambling to deal with technology we don\u2019t understand.<\/p>\n

\n

Stephen Embry is a lawyer, speaker, blogger, and writer. He publishes\u00a0TechLaw Crossroads<\/a>, a blog devoted to the examination of the tension between technology, the law, and the practice of law<\/strong><\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The post Are We Prepared To Deal With The Coming Wearable Revolution?<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The buzz this year at CES<\/a> isn\u2019t just agentic AI. It\u2019s also wearables and their coming power and use. And as with agentic AI, these wearables could have significant implications and pose challenges for legal.<\/p>\n

The Rise of Wearables<\/strong><\/p>\n

When we talk about wearables, we are talking about things like glasses, watches, and necklaces that are not only fashion pieces, but which can actually do things. While the notion of wearing something like a smart watch that can do things like show your emails, enable your smart devices to do things, or track your heart rate has been around for a while, the difference now is that these wearables can combine with AI, agentic AI, virtual reality, and augmented reality to do much more.<\/p>\n

A simple such wearable is the Meta glasses<\/a>. These glasses can read your text messages and allow you to take a video or picture with a touch of the temple. But you can also verbally ask the glasses questions like \u201cwhat am I looking at?\u201d or \u201ctell me about this painting I am seeing in the museum.\u201d By combining with AI, the glasses can whisper an answer in your ear which no one else can hear.<\/p>\n

And that\u2019s just the beginning. I attended a panel discussion in which Resh Sidhu<\/a>, the Senior Director of Innovation of Snap Inc.<\/a>, talked about what her company is developing. Snap is the company behind the social media tool Snapchat<\/a>. Snapchat introduced the first glasses wearable back in 2016 and has been working on them ever since. Sidhu showed a short video of how future versions of Snapchat glasses could combine with AR, VR, and AI to do amazing things, like line her up for a perfect 3 pointer in a pickup basketball game. Or be her companion on a trip to Paris like an experienced tour guide.<\/p>\n

At the Lenovo<\/a> keynote, the presenters talked about a wearable necklace that could do similar things. It\u2019s still a proof in concept but the direction is clear. Several presenters in several contexts talked about AI wearables that \u201csee what you see and hear what you hear\u201d and can respond to your needs.<\/p>\n

The advantage, of course, is that these wearables allow the wearer to \u201cdo things in the moment without reaching out to a screen that pulls us away,\u201d according to Sidhu.<\/p>\n

These wearables have tremendous potential. They can increase safety. They can be training guides. They can provide useful information and understanding of complex issues. They can always be on awaiting you to say \u201chey Meta,\u201d or whatever the command should be (don\u2019t worry, \u201chey Siri\u201d still won\u2019t get you very far).<\/p>\n

Advantages for Lawyers<\/strong><\/p>\n

For lawyers, it\u2019s easy to see some advantages. Think about taking a deposition where your glasses suggest questions and follow up while you are looking at the witness for body language instead of your screen.<\/p>\n

Or one of things that used to bedevil me as a young lawyer in a courtroom: your glasses can tell you, \u201cHey, object, hearsay.\u201d And tell you why. Or supply you information to answer your client\u2019s questions in an in-person meeting. Or combine with other tools to explain what your opponent is doing when he makes certain arguments to a judge or takes a position. Or help you deal with and understand what a mediator is doing in a mediation.<\/p>\n

Lots of benefits. But also, some real issues and therein lies the challenges to legal.<\/p>\n

Legal Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n

These high-powered wearables raise some interesting issues. I wrote recently<\/a> about an AI proctor that detects if a witness is using AI in a remote interview in large part by determining if the person is looking at a screen. Good idea. But what happens if the person doesn\u2019t need a screen to get the AI answer? It\u2019s provided through the witness\u2019s glasses. \u00a0<\/p>\n

Suppose a witness takes the stand to testify wearing glasses. How do we know that they aren\u2019t being fed the answers by a bot? \u00a0Do we demand that the glasses be examined? I\u2019m not sure our courts are ready for that.<\/p>\n

The Bot is Lying<\/strong><\/p>\n

And what happens if the advice the bot gives is wrong and someone acts on it. Most of us know that LLMs make mistakes and hallucinate regularly. It\u2019s one thing when it provides the output on a screen, it\u2019s another when it provides the output in the moment, in your ear. We have enough problems with people acting in the spur of the moment with screen output; the temptation to run with an output whispered in your ear is far more.<\/p>\n

Privacy Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are privacy issues as well. All these devices are creating data. Where does it go? Who has access? Will it be discoverable? Imagine your client getting a discovery demand for everything their glasses created and kept. We have enough trouble with clients creating evidentiary trails when they type in inputs \u2014 wearables will increase the problems multifold.<\/p>\n

And it\u2019s not just your privacy that\u2019s at stake. I have a pair of first-generation Meta glasses. I can take a picture or video that those around me would scarcely detect, violating their privacy.<\/p>\n

The Impact on Dispute Resolution<\/strong><\/p>\n

Certainly, that kind of world would eliminate a lot of \u201che said, she said\u201d disputes if there is data someplace that would clarify it, much like police body cams often tell the real story, provided they are turned on. These kinds of disputes are often difficult to litigate since they often turn on who the fact finder finds more credible and that can hinge on a variety of the unpredictable factors.<\/p>\n

But even in those kinds of disputes, our litigation system is designed to make determinations about who is telling the truth based on a totality of facts and testimony about interactions between people. But AI wearables could easily turn the totality of facts that explain behavior into a sound bite.<\/p>\n

And what would that kind of world be where you have to think about everything you say or do? Can you imagine the posturing and games that would be played? Set ups, where one party employs an orchestrating letter or statement designed to provoke a reaction are already pretty common. It\u2019s a gamesmanship tactic I\u2019ve seen used over and over again by both lawyers and clients. Wearables increase the opportunity and temptation to do just that.<\/p>\n

A Lack of Guardrails<\/strong><\/p>\n

Right now, there are few rules or guardrails in place except for those the vendors may provide out of the goodness of their hearts. The only law is the notion that there must be consent for a conversation to be recorded. While a few states require both parties\u2019 consent, most states only require that one person consent, rendering the rule moot to begin with.<\/p>\n

Do we need to require those with AI wearables to disclose that fact when interacting with others? Isn\u2019t there an inherent disadvantage in substantive interactions where one person has access to AI and can create a record and the other doesn\u2019t?<\/p>\n

And don\u2019t forget, there is still the issue of deepfakes. Outputs from AI wearables could easily be manipulated to make what happened look a lot different than what really did.<\/p>\n

Our Responsibility<\/strong><\/p>\n

It\u2019s often said to whom much is given, much is expected. The concept applies here. Wearables offer tremendous potential benefits across a broad spectrum of life. But with those benefits comes our responsibility as lawyers and legal professionals to think hard about the issues and risks these wearables bring to the legal process and to dispute resolutions.<\/p>\n

We have already seen the result of a lack of planning and thinking about the risks of evidence manipulation that deepfakes have brought. Courts and litigants unprepared to deal with those scenarios and questions. A lack of rules and guidance. A threat to our system.<\/p>\n

Without planning and forethought, we could end up in the same place with wearable issues. Legal has not only been slow to embrace technology, it\u2019s also been slow to understand the risks technology brings to things like the rule of law and fundamental fairness.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s been said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. The time is now to think about how to manage the risks to legal while appreciating the benefits and use of these tools by society. Otherwise, we will be facing the same crisis with wearables as we are with deepfakes: scrambling to deal with technology we don\u2019t understand.<\/p>\n

\n

Stephen Embry is a lawyer, speaker, blogger, and writer. He publishes\u00a0TechLaw Crossroads<\/a>, a blog devoted to the examination of the tension between technology, the law, and the practice of law<\/strong><\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The post Are We Prepared To Deal With The Coming Wearable Revolution?<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The buzz this year at CES isn\u2019t just agentic AI. It\u2019s also wearables and their coming power and use. And as with agentic AI, these wearables could have significant implications and pose challenges for legal. The Rise of Wearables When we talk about wearables, we are talking about things like glasses, watches, and necklaces that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-141396","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141396","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=141396"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141396\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141396"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141396"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141396"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}