They are ubiquitous in snowsport environments - every time I go skiing I see a dozen of the things. I've thought about getting one myself, to use as the equivalent of a Russian dashcam for my motorcycle commute. It doesn't feel the same as the Google Glass would, though, where the person just wears it all the time. That seems creepy.
In both one party and all party consent situations, audio can still be recorded. The governing law with regards to recording audio is Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 119 of the US Code. As with most laws, trying to read and understand it is a daunting task. But it all comes down to one definition in this code. Section 2510 Paragraph 2 states:
“oral communication” means any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation, but such term does not include any electronic communication.
So, this essentially means that, if a person expects their conversation to be private, then it is illegal to record it. So, it is up to you to ensure that they don’t have any expectation of privacy
Google Glasses are not surveillance devices. They are not surreptitious. By the notions of all party consent, every smartphone video capture (which includes audio, and often includes the conversations of other people) would see people thrown in jail. Is that happening?
By any rational measure a big camera on the side of your head tells everyone that they are being recorded. No one will ever see any legal issues for this and that is a gigantic red herring.
