A cop just stopped me and gave me a ticket for wearing Google Glass while driving!
The exact line says: Driving with Monitor visible to Driver (Google Glass).
Is #GoogleGlass  ilegal while driving or is this cop wrong???
Any legal advice is appreciated!! This happened in California. Do you know any other #GlassExplorers  that got a similar ticket anywhere in the US?
586
655
Paulus Spernbauer's profile photoOsamah Anjum's profile photoGarrett Barker's profile photoJake Weisz's profile photo
498 comments
Matt Abdou
+
15
3
4
3
 
Please please please, fight this in court. We need to get a ruling on this. I'm sure we can get a good collection together to pay for a proper attorney.
 
Totally! We need to get to the bottom of this!
 
What would this mean for GPS units?
 
This is the law he referenced: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27602.htm
 
This law is to prevent people from watching TV in their car. Seriously. You don't need an attorney for this, you can beat this by yourself. I have won several tickets in court. I'll fly down there to help you in court if you like.
 
Apparently the exact rule is: Do not drive a vehicle equipped with a video monitor, if the monitor is visible to the driver and displays anything other than vehicle information global mapping displays, external media player (mp3) or satellite radio information ...
 
That law is amazingly ambiguous. If this law is enforced for Glass then that means nobody can drive a vehicle with a phone, tablet or GPS mounted in front of the driver as they can all be made to show video.
 
It's entirely up to you Cecilia but if you want to fight it I can help set up a donation campaign online for an attorney, get some references for a good attorney in your area, then fly down for the court date.
Dan Baran
+
3
5
6
5
 
I'm sure there are some attorneys that might even take the case for the name getting out there if this is the first Glass related case
 
wow... this is absurd... i would record the incident and probably get arrested for throwing the balled up ticket at his face... 
 
Wow - how ridiculous! Since Glass is off unless activated, can this even count as a violation?
 
+Dan Baran Has a very good point. We should send this post to a couple of local news stations. Get some attention, get an attorney pro-bono, and beat this thing.
 
This is definitely an issue that needs to be settled properly. I'd be willing to contribute what I can if an attorney fund is started.
 
I think it is going to be time for a court room demonstration!
 
It might be worth seeing if +Google Glass would assist in the case or file an amicus brief.
 
I live in California. I have had similar questions about viewing your various monitored devices while driving. I noticed that our police officers drive with their laptops visible to the driver. If they are allowed to do it everyone should be. So I asked a retired police officer and his response was it is not illegal to drive looking at a monitor, but it will always be illegal to drive distracted.
 
Yes, that's what I was thinking, any lawyer or law firm should love to get this case ...
Yes +Keith Achorn Glass was not on and I honestly don't use it much while driving but I do wear. He kept saying it was blocking my view ...
 
I don't think this is that serious....

Stupid? Absurd? Absolutely. Donation fund / fly down for trial serious? IMO no
 
+Matt Abdou  I agree, but I would venture to bet that if you WERE playing a video on said mounted phone, you would get the same ticket.  The problem here seems to be that there is no way he could know what was displayed at the time.  That's probably your best argument +Cecilia Abadie .  That, and the fact that the display is not in your direct line of sight, so it is just like a mounted phone, which you would have to actively choose to look at it and is not constantly obstructing your view.

Congrats on being a pioneer in this area of the law though.  Seriously, I have a lot of lawyer friends who would probably LOVE to argue this in front of a court just for the publicity (ok, maybe the experience of a lifetime thing too).  Good luck +Cecilia Abadie !

Note: This is not my legal opinion...just my geeky opinion.
 
+Cam Meadows i live in FL and i've heard of essentially the same thing... they hand tickets out for people with videos/movies playing and its also why manufacturers of car dvd players (including US sold vehicles with navigation units) do not allow video playback while the vehicle is moving... i've seen police officers on FACEBOOK while driving... 
 
+Chris Sewell I've fought police before for ticketing laws that made absolutely no sense. It makes me crazy. The fact that this involves Glass just makes it worse.

+Dan Baran Having several Glass wearers in the audience at the hearing would be a good show of support.

I love the "blocking your view" comment. Glass doesn't block your view of anything.
 
Nobody said serious +Chris Sewell, but it sure will be interesting as first cases do set precedent for other cases that come after.
 
Driving law in California is amazing. I am mystified why anyone would put up with it.
 
I'd fight it. Teslas have huge "monitors" too. 
 
+Chris Sewell I'd say it's worth fighting it with the best defense that can be reasonably obtained, and since it's an issue that affects a lot of Glass enthusiasts, wanting to contribute support isn't unreasonable.
 
ACAB

I'm pretty sure my 2 year old writes neater than this cop. Damn shame.
 
+Cecilia Abadie did  you atleast offer him an invite to let you off the hook?

In all seriousness fight it I might not have a lot of money to contribute but I am sure I could scrounge up a few bucks if needed.
 
+Matt Abdou this is easily the absolute dumbest ticket I've ever seen written, that's for sure. Maybe he was butthurt he hasn't been invited?

+Cecilia Abadie offering to start fund raisers for attorneys and offering to fly down there for the trial is taking it more serious than I think this should be taken.

+Josh Brown a success without an attorney is just as valid as one with. I don't think this one needs some super expensive attorney, certainly not one that requires a donation fund. Even +Matt Abdou agreed that this likely doesn't need an attorney in a comment above.
 
+Chris Sewell While I do agree that this can easily be won without an attorney, I think the point is that it's a very important court case (even though it is just a traffic ticket) and so should be handled by a professional attorney.
 
I agree +Chris Sewell on not taking it too seriously. I would not accept money from anyone, but I think Glass is the best hands free device out there at the time and hope some lawyer wants to help clarify this.
 
Precedence is the key here, fight it and win. I am curious, were you pulled over specifically because he saw your Glass?
 
+Matt Abdou I disagree, but to each their own.

+Cecilia Abadie I wasn't saying you were claiming it was that serious, just the people saying that a donation fund / flight was in order.

In the end there is no way this will hold up in court. Now, or tomorrow.
 
It looks like there are two items listed on the ticket. It's pretty difficult to read but I believe it's a speeding infraction and then the tv monitor infraction.
 
+Matt Abdou that just answered my "How the hell did the cop even see it?!" question then.

At least he didn't try and pull it as a first offense, that'd been even dumber.
 
+Chris Sewell If you ask most case lawyers, they'll tell you that even with a sure case you've got a 50/50 shot.
 
Fight it and keep us updated.

If you don't fight it, you'll end up pay I g the same amount regardless.


PS-I would throw in that you were using the navigation. 
 
Surely its just the same as having a heads up display ( speedo ) on the window as in many new cars. 
 
That's right +Matt Abdou! The speeding was justified as I was in a 65 mph zone and thought I was on a 75mph zone, I always feel like I need some software to alert me when zones change ... is that only me??
 
+Cecilia Abadie Can you verify the violation code written on the ticket? It looks like it starts with 27602. If the police officer incorrectly wrote the wrong violation code, a judge will dismiss it. If you share the number we can verify it with California code. It appears as though you also got a speeding ticket at the same time. That number is correct.
 
Looking at the ticket it was not the primary reason for getting stopped.  It is the 3rd infraction on the ticket.
 
california has the broad distraction law in place you can pick your nose and get a ticket lol
 
+Josh Brown because most case lawyers would prefer you take that 50/50 shot after giving them money.
 
It's the second of two violations. The officer merely continued to write on the third line.
 
If this was a ticket as a first infraction, I'd be all over it too. But it's not, I think this cop was just being a dick and I doubt it'll hold up in court.
 
+Rick Fowler it seems like  27602 and them some letters as U CA or similar. And yes, the speeding was legit first reason for the ticket +Richard Steinbicker, there's no third reason. The cop was being really nasty and asking me again and again why I was wearing Google Glass in the car.
 
While cop is talking, discretely mutter: "Okay, Glass... record a video"....
 
+Jake Rullman I can't believe I did not take a pic or video, seriously, everybody should have seen his attitude ...
 
It is not illegal in CA... Trust me. :-) 
 
+Chris Sewell I apologize for reposting I missed it way earlier since it wasn't a link
 
It's all in how a judge will interpret it and I suspect their love or hate and understanding of the technology might help or the opposite 
 
If it was so important to have a lawyer there for this ruling, Google would likely be in contact with this person looking to help seeing as it's rather important for them that it's not illegal to wear Glass while driving.
 
+Cecilia Abadie I wish you had gotten a video of this jerk. Though, with your luck, he'd have found a way to give you a ticket for that as well :(
 
Personally, and I may be missin something here, but if your drivin on my roads I don't want you lookin at your phone, a t.v. or a google glass. Watch the roads!! 
 
+Karen French That's fine and all, but she's well within her legal right to be wearing glass while driving. You're welcome to your opinion however.
 
+Karen French there's a difference between wearing Glass and watching Glass. Also it doesn't seem like you ever tried Glass, when you do you realize it's an excellent hands free device for GPS and calls.
 
+Cecilia Abadie a lot of people misunderstand how glass works. More specifically, how you don't focus on the prism, rather you focus ahead of glass with the way glass projects the image. In my experience it's safer than using any modern GPS unit to date because of this.
 
She wasn't actively using it, +Karen French. She had it turned off, and not to mention, Glass doesn't obstruct your normal vision. You have to purposely look at it, it's not in your way.

Even if it was on, Glass does a very good job of presenting you information without distracting you. 

I doubt it's an issue for her, or anyone, to wear Glass while driving.
 
That's why I said I may be missing something. Okay point made. The guy was wrong. My phone is linked to my cars bluetooth so what's the diff?
 
Actually, in my experience, the judges are usually extremely fair.
 
Did he have an iPhone by chance? Hater.... Seriously though that's sad. People eat breakfast while driving, put on makeup while driving, look in the glove box while driving, and that goes by the system. Glass is no more distracting than a rear view mirror, maybe you should rip that distraction off the window!

Sorry to hear you had a bad experience, don't let it bring you down, we are all part of something amazing, and nothing can take that away...
 
Don't a lot of cars have monitors visible to the driver. i.e. navigation console. The Tesla has a huge monitor.
 
So what happens with prescription lenses in glass. DL says corrective lenses but tickets are given
 
+Cecilia Abadie correct, and in the US they are restricted from playing video while the vehicle is driving iirc
 
+Chris Sewell I know! I couldn't resist! I don't judge! sometimes you have to take a little jab to help a fellow community member feel a little better. 
 
+Rob Jackson The screen was off and not in use. That was established earlier in the thread. I'll give you that the thread's gotten a bit too long to read all of it.
 
+Rob Jackson did you read the comments?

She said she wasn't using it, not that she was using it for nave. She also said that she didn't record the incident.
 
+Matt Abdou According to the CA VC 27602. the only devices allowed are "installed" in the vehicle and provide GPS, Driver Assist, or Vehicle Information, and any other uses must be disabled via an interlock device that turns off features when vehicle is in motion.

As well Emergency Vehicles (cops, EMTs, CalTrans) are exempt from this rule.

it sucks! but I think its a loss....

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27602.htm
 
+Rob Jackson I'm not sure you totally tip toed around looking spammy there buddy.

No offense, I just call it as I see it.
 
+Aaron Kasten I don't think his comment was spammy personally, and I hate phandroid... so that's saying something
 
I guess it was all the hash tagging and name dropping...

And starting off with announcing hey look our company site shared it.
 
Ah, gotcha. I thought you meant for dropping a link to the phandroid page.

Seriously though, who starts off a serious article with "First of all the ticketing cop needs to get a life."

sigh Stay classy
 
There are laws in some states that technically make a GPS illegal unless it is mounted. Mounted on your face wouldn't pass muster in those states.
I don't wear Glass while driving because I promised my wife I wouldn't. She's a higher law.
 
Wow, this IS big news. It will be interesting to find out what happens. What a crappy thing to be cool too. 
 
Any chance we could get a clearer image of what he wrote there, it's very fuzzy.

I work with lawyers at a company that works with legal information and I intend to see what they think about this ticket and interpretation of the video monitor law tomorrow.
 
Thanks for the kind words with the hate cherry on top +Chris Sewell  haha. Keep calling them how you see them +Aaron Kasten, just trying to be helpful. But I wouldn't want others to think that so I've deleted my comment... 

Talk about a tough crowd. Geez.
 
Do you think it is safe to drive while having a HUD?
 
+Gil Zhaiek Absolutely. If you can fly a fighter jet with a HUD, you can drive a car with a HUD.
 
+Jake Weisz  What are the chances of you hitting another jet while flying?  And I don't think it is the same.
 
Putting your GPS instructions on a transparent HUD that overlays that visual instruction over your view of the road is much safer than your cell phone or a GPS that you have to look away from the road to see.

I feel much safer with the GPS on Glass than I do with the GPS on my phone because I can keep my eyes firmly on the road while wearing glass.

Absolutely nobody uses glass to watch videos when they are trying to do something else, it makes no sense.  And I could certainly see an argument against using glass to read anything other than GPS when driving, but as a GPS it is much much safer than a phone because you keep your eyes trained on the road which is exactly where they are supposed to be.
 
+Gil Zhaiek do you think looking down at an instrument panel is a superior form of information delivery vs a HUD?
 
+Aaron Kasten the information doesn't change - the brain is used to it.  A new Facebook post is much different on the brain than the old dial moving around based on speed.  So yes, it is much safer.
 
I typically wear glass when I'm driving even when I don't use GPS for the following reasons:

1) I get used to wearing it all the time.
2) If it is day time, I use the sun shades that come with glass to protect my eyes while driving because glass has become the shades I use.

I don't use it to text while driving or anything like that and ignore any incoming notifications (which frankly while you are driving are hard to hear anyway).

What many people don't realize is that the screen doesn't activate itself, you hear a chime and then you have to do an action to activate the screen, which sits in your peripheral vision, not obstructing your view whatsoever.

this issue is going to become more important soon when glass comes attached to prescription glasses.  I certainly will not want to have to switch to another pair of glasses in order to drive.
 
That was exactly my answer to the cop when he asked why was I wearing Glass while driving +Nick Moline, I said I wear this all day long! I think he was trying to make me say what I was using it for so he kept asking why why why, but then when he saw my answer was I'm not using it just wearing it, he broke out talking about how Glass was blocking my vision and he could not completely see my right eye ...
 
Glass allows hands-free operation, and cops can't ticket you for having your standalone GPS screen visible while driving -- or the screen / display on the dashboard of your car, or on your radio. They also can't ticket you for operating the knobs on your radio or A/C with your hands while driving though, so there are a lot of double standards here.

The best feature of Glass is probably in-your-field-of-view navigation. At the same time, I guarantee that the human brain is not concentrating on the road when you're looking at what's going on in the Glass field of view, and thinking about what's on the screen. Even HUDs projected on the windshield can be extremely dangerous for that reason. I had a friend who used to put his phone over the speedometer and watch movies while driving. But the brain literally shuts off the higher level cognitive functions associated with driving from about 1/4 of a second before you switch your focus to a screen and start processing the information on it until about 1/4 of a second after you look back at the road. (That's right, the first 1/4 of a second that you're looking back at the road, you're not fully aware of what's going on or able to respond, it takes a bit for the brain to get back in sync and understand what it's looking at.) If you're constantly looking back and forth, your brain can be disengaged from the road for much longer periods of time than it takes for a small child to run out on the road or the guy in front of you to slam on the brakes. Just because Glass is almost in your normal FoV doesn't mean it gives you any advantage in terms of mental ability to multitask.
 
It's simply a part of our attire, we don't remove it to drive or do anything else. Except shower, perhaps, though +Robert Scoble will even wear them doing that.
 
+Luke Hutchison you are wrong about the law - it is illegal to obstruct  your view.  Same go for these people that put dolls on their front wind shield - they pass the law.
 
Although I definitely don't remove it while sleeping at the wheel.
 
+Gil Zhaiek: Yes/no, it depends: see http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc26708.htm -- you're allowed to obstruct your windshield with a GPS unit, with the following stipulations. Maybe if you could wear Glass below your normal FoV while driving, it would satisfy these requirements?: "26708.  (a) (1) A person shall not drive any motor vehicle with any object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied upon the windshield or side or rear windows. (2) A person shall not drive any motor vehicle with any object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied in or upon the vehicle that obstructs or reduces the driver’s clear view through the windshield or side windows. (3) This subdivision applies to a person driving a motor vehicle with the driver’s clear vision through the windshield, or side or rear windows, obstructed by snow or ice. (b) This section does not apply to any of the following: [...] (12) A portable Global Positioning System (GPS), which may be mounted in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver or in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver and outside of an airbag deployment zone, if the system is used only for door-to-door navigation while the motor vehicle is being operated."
 
I really hope you can fight it and I hope +Google Glass gets involved in the case. This is an opportunity to address a serious issue for wearable computing and Glass specifically.

How can technology progress if our backwards, outdated laws are holding it back out of ignorance?
 
Actually, based on that, you might be able to argue that the Glass display is not obstructing the windshield, if you can show that based on where you normally sit and how high you wear Glass on your nose, the actual Glass display overlaps with the roof of the car in your visual field. This may only work for tall people.
 
Obstructing the eye, hmmm. Let's see.
My sunglasses tend to partially do that with the top of the frame. Not to mention the tinting on the lenses.
What about people with only one eye? I don't see them being banned from driving.
 
+Cecilia Abadie Cops try to get you to admit your guilt. It holds up extremely well in court. Anyway, that code stipulates that the display must be operating and visible to the driver in order to be in violation. Since it was off (and the cop can't prove otherwise), this should be an easy case. Go for a removal of points for speeding too. Cops don't even ticket for 10 mph over where I am, but I guess that things could be different in CA.
 
I know the law varies by state, but out here in Colorado, I actually gave a quick demo of Glass to a cop that was directing traffic from the street while I was stopped at a red light. Video. Pictures. Translations. You name it. He absolutely loved it, said he can't wait until everyone has RFID chip implants in their skulls, and DID NOT give me a ticket afterwards. Again, I know laws are different state to state, and I'm no lawyer, but I say fight the "Glass infraction" that you got in CA with the passion of a 1,000 burning suns :-)
 
I'm a lawyer licensed in CA and would love to help you here if I can. Please email me, and we can discuss?
 
So the cop was pissed that you did not offer a demo... ;)
 
Unfortunately I think +Cecilia Abadie received the second citation because this cop walked up to the car and assumed he was being recorded. Some police officers get super grumpy when the cameras get whipped out. This about the camera on glass and what that represents.
Jess L
+
1
2
1
 
I'm interested to see what happens too.
 
I wonder if the +Google Glass team could offer support of some kind. Surely this scenario has come up in prior discussions.
 
The law is very ambiguous, I would contest the ticket on the basis that the unit wasn't active at the time of the alleged offence. It should then be for the police to prove otherwise 
 
Driving with Monitor visible to Driver? Do they stop people for using a GPS navigation system? How about stopping people for driving a Tesla S (dashboard is one big monitor - even the speedometer)? Stupidity knows no boundaries...
 
+Cecilia Abadie please please do this the right way and hire an attorney. We don't want you to lose and have a precedence set stating that wearing Glass and driving is illegal in California.
 
Well to be honest how are you ment to concentrate on the road properly with that on your face? All eyes should be on the road! Surely that's just as bad as a Mobile! 
 
+Amber Mitchell - Honestly, I find it to be much safer, my eyes are more focused on the road than when I used my mounted GPS in the past. Much safer, in my experience.
 
On the flip side, while you may not have been looking up into the glass what about the next person who swears they weren't distracted as they're explaining why they rear ended someone on the highway. Frankly people lie about anything and everything. The officer doesn't know whether you are or are not looking at video or whatever in the glass and reasonably assumes you are. California has been making it very clear they don't even want the temptation of distracted driving.
 
Great point +Derek Ross, what next you can't wear a smart watch? Or a watch? What if my watch makes a beep and distracts me. Overkill is overkill.
 
Regardless of distractions +Hank Yeomans, rear end collisions are the “textbook example” of the type of accident in which the rear ending vehicle is almost 100% at fault and is solely responsible for the accident. Only a few odd instances make the vehicle in front liable (example: Ayers v. Singh, 1997 CanLII 3410 (BCCA))

I find it ridiculous to make wearing Google Glass illegal while driving, how is having it display navigation instructions different from on-windshield projected instructions that are supposedly safer than in-dash on-screen navigation?
 
+Charles Gaulin I understand your point, but my point is all it's going to take is one person having glass on their face while getting into an accident and it's all over. 
 
Hey wait up. I just noticed something. On the paper, Glass is mentionned, but the line end itself, which may or may not indicate that <entry> is an infraction, does not have its I (for infraction, I'd guess) circled.

Does that mean the Cop went FUDdy on our asses? +Cecilia Abadie, +Matt Abdou and/or anyone technical, can you check this?
 
You are guilty. Pay the fine and get on with life.
 
I know this doesn't help but this cop's handwriting really sucks. Just throwing that out there.
 
+Matt Abdou Actually you can't.  The GPS is supposed to be mounted to the side, not in front.  Some one fought and lost when they touched their phone while it was in the GPS mode.  the phone was mounted like any other GPS. The Judge ruled a phone is a phone and a single purpose GPS is a single purpose GPS.  
 
Google should be helping you get out in front of this for the sake of their product.
 
+Matt Abdou Im pretty sure Google can pay for the law suite for this since it is their product.
 
+James Grigg +Pat Buffolino Google is, at least technically, in no way, shape or form obligated to anything in this case, as they outline that users should not be using Glass while driving.
 
How myopically ambiguous! Definitely contest this as it will set precedence for Explorers and others across all the states.
 
+Renaud Lepage I know Google is not obligated but equally they would endorse driving with Glass if a ruling is passed. If they want it passed then they should pay the costs.
 
+Marty Ballard Yes sir. You get distracted by anything and a cop sees you do something suddenly that causes a danger.  sudden slow down, swerve, you can be pulled over and ticketed.
 
People are distracted enough without getting a text about nothing while driving. It's a distraction pure and simple.What information, while driving is more important the paying attention to the "real world" around you? If you need to have this torrent of information while in transit, take public transportation, hire a limo or better yet get one of Googles autonomous cars. I love my tech, but there's a time and place for everything. 
 
I would fight it Cecelia. Google Glass can display navigation information. There is no way the cop could see or determine with absolute certainty what was being displayed from his vantage point. By the way, BMW has something in the works that tells you via a HUD that the speed zone has changed. It does this via a dash cam that scans for speed signs then compares your vehicle speed with the posted sign. If you're speeding, the software tells you via visual & audible cues.
 
+Michael Pechner I actually remember that ruling not too long ago too. They came down hard saying you couldn't touch your phone even if it was being used for GPS.
 
Reach out to Google.  Maybe they'll be in your corner on this one.  After all, this could affect the future sales of Glass...
 
Illegal, pay the ticket, don't do it again. Be safe on the road.
You were speeding too, so you were distracted.....?
 
+Hank Yeomans well what I would hope is that to specifically get this device banned you'd have to prove that Glass wearers had more accidents than non-Glass drivers. Probably even go further and show that the likelihood of a crash while wearing Glass was higher than a driver who used a GPS or even had a cellphone.

Would be an interesting study. Given I'm guessing the demographic for Glass probably has a huge overlap with gamers, and gamers tend to have faster visual reaction speeds than +Luke Hutchison states, I'd even wager that Glass wearers would come in with less accidents. Any undergrads looking for a thesis? 
 
Dangerous precedent for HUD use. Unfortunately, many of the negative commenters here don't seem to have used Glass or understand how it works. Practically speaking, because it is tacked onto a speeding infraction, I suspect you are going to get little sympathy from the judge. If that area is a known speed trap for revenue generation purposes (we are getting to the end of the month) that might help.
 
Y'all seem to be assuming they really care one way or another about whether it's actually safe or dangerous to drive with Google Glass. Maybe it's just the cynic in me but I think they just decided it could be another revenue generator...
 
Stop looking to the internet to find ways around the law. Just don't wear it. Facebook/Google + can wait. 

And don't expect Google to endorse using glass while driving. Dead bodies hurts the bottom line more than annoyed upper-class folk. 
 
Maybe the cop saw your TED talk? :-)
 
After looking over the law in California I would highly suggest lawyering up for this. It's not going to be long before this gains larger media coverage and causes more discussion. Plus California law is especially strict on this mater.
 
It's against the law to obstruct your vision while driving and it's against the law the use digital devices while driving. And even if it's not in your state Google Glass is an unnecessary distraction. 
 
+Cecilia Abadie when you present your argument to the court, you need to draw a distinction between passive HUD-like driver aids and TVs/Tablets. I own a 2011 Camaro SS, the car has a HUD (OEM, it was built into the car by Chevy) that bounces a display off of the windshield to overlay all sorts of active, dynamic information. Not only does California allow these HUDs, current ones even update you with non-driving data, like the artist and track name when a song changes. I would strongly suggest you center your argument around likening Glass to existing HUDs in today's vehicles. Existing HUD displays in cars are lawful in California, and if the judge believes his precedent may endanger the ability of hundreds of thousands of California motorists to lawfully operate their vehicles unless they participate in a defacto state-wide removal or deactivation of those displays, he won't touch a precedent-setting guilty verdict with a 10 foot poll.

Here's what existing HUDs are like, for reference: http://www.chevrolet.com/content/dam/Chevrolet/northamerica/usa/nscwebsite/en/Home/Vehicles/Cars/2014_Camaro_ZL1_Convertible/Model_Overview/01_images/2014-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-convertible-model-overview-technology-cnt-well-1-648x316-03.jpg
 
Plenty of opinion has already been said, but hash out the law referenced by +Matt Abdou ( http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27602.htm ).

The law defines five classes of permitted electronic screens in cars. They range from GPS, to info displays, all the way to video screens that are design to not be used when the car is moving.

What would be key here is how the court would see the device, two scenarios come to mind:
A) Ticket is void: Glass' main use in a car would be for driving directions -- therefore it is a mapping device; or
B) Ticket is valid: While Google Glass can be used as a mapping/navigation device, police have no way to know the user isn't watching video and therefore it is a class 5 device that fails the required safety mechanisms. 

The rest of law is exemptions for utility workers, cops, and emergency workers.

Really, it would depend on the judge you get.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, don't take it as legal advice. Just food for thought.
 
[personal marker] to follow story/conversation.
 
+Ken Hawkins I would not argue it as if Glass were a mapping device. This opens Cecilia up to the judge weighing the location of the display, evaluation of whether it is like center dash unit, and calls into question when it can and would be actively interacted with (current navigational displays disallow interaction when moving). The latter of those three concerns causes me to shy away from a navigational aid argument, as Glass is not built to disable itself to block user interaction when moving. The HUD angle is more compelling, as it's lawful and intended to be in the drivers straight ahead view.
 
+Daniel Buchner Reasonable point. But the big $ question here is if a judge would say it can display video and therefore must have block the video features while the car is use, as required by class 5 devices.
 
 I don't really know a great deal about Glass, but from what I can gather its basically a HUD, yes?  Seems to me if there is any distraction on the monitor while you're driving or, more to the point, any distraction that could pop up without notice, then he's probably right to bop you.  A HUD on the windscreen would be far less of the FoV than Glass.  

At the end of the day, though, it probably comes down to what you were doing with it at the time.  If it was a GPS nav system, maybe that's ok depending on its FoV coverage.  On the other hand, if it was G+ or some shit, I think you were fool.
 
Hopefully you can write the court, motioning for discovery or dismissal:

- A list of exempted devices.
- Testimonial answer from the person who issued the summons as to what methods were used to ensure / determine that the device was not exempted.

Depending on the courts rules - You may also be able to motion for dismissal, if the court fails to meet the discovery request, or in lieu of that discovery request.

Don't get tricked (by the court) into defending yourself... The onus is on the 'state' to validate the complaint... Though the court is going to try and put you on the defensive... You need to be aware of that tactic - And not let yourself slip into the defensive position.

Part of the above approach is to make it not financially feasible to try and prosecute you... The court and the prosecutors office weigh the cost of  their efforts (compared to the fine amount), and the chance that a precedent may be laid against their ability to prosecute others.

If they dismiss - Then they get to keep writing the tickets and collecting from the unwitting.
 
Once you have a site set-up, to take donations for your legal defense fund, I'll happily contribute.
 
+Ken Hawkins correct, but do remember, the burden is on the State. The judge can't and shouldn't pursue investigation of the fact Glass is capable of XYZ activity, the cop would have to argue that point (I wonder if the CHiP even knows that - most are clueless)

Here's a bigger question: +Cecilia Abadie did the officer ask you if he could handle and examine the device to check if it was on/off? Did you at anytime admit it was on? If not, I'd immediately argue it was off, there's no way to know, and THEY, not you, have the burden to show it was - which would be almost impossible.
 
In the UK, it is legal to use dedicated satnav systems, but it is not legal to use a smartphone or tablet even if it is acting as a satnav. I suspect that GG would fall under the same rules.
 Oh, and the first line looks like http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22348.htm to me.
 
Some cars has projected speedometer and GPS on the dashboard/glass.  Does that also make that illegal.  The argument is consistent to wearing a Google glass, no?
 
why so blurry and why is speed circled? Looks like GG was a secondary violation not why you got pulled over, but cause you you did 85  when that wasn't the speed limit.
Yerzhan T
+
1
3
4
3
 
Here is my take on this:
1. You were cited for doing 80 mph in a 65mph zone and you passed a police vehicle at that speed. This is the #1 reason why you were cited. Perphans give us a high quality picture? If you want help here, how about taking out your smartphone for a better picture? You will probably be forced to pay the ticket just because of that.
2. Google Glass is in fact a distraction, because it displays your GPS and other information including facebook in your direct view. Therefore it is obstructing your view of the road. The reason why GPS units and dash screens are not counted is because they never obstruct your views. However, try putting up a GPS unit right in front of your face and time your watch on how long it will take to get a cop to pull you over.
3. Even if Google Glass was obstructing your view (I believe it did), fight the ticket only because it will be fun to see the result.
4. Let's not get carried away here people, this is a ticket, not a criminal or high profile case. Resolution of the ticket will not bring some kind of a stand for future reference, it will not become a reference case. It's just a ticket, but I would fight it either way for personal knowledge as well as for tech blogs.
5. Next time just take them off.
6. Donation site? This is not a case, it's a ticket. Really? A donation site? Do we need donation sites for everything today? I got a bad look from a cop last night, can I get a donation club as well?
 
+Hon-Yin Kok is right, I have a HUD(heads up display) in my car and it displays over most of the bottom portion of driver side view. It's transparent, so it does not obstruct the view. Glass covers a smaller portion of my view than my vehicle HUD. Google made Glass technology so it is up and out of the way.
 
+Daniel Buchner  Tampering with evidence is illegal. And lying in the court of law is even worse. They don't need to prove anything, it's all in here.
 
1. Get pulled over for going too fast
2. Give copper bad attitude
3. Proceed to get fine for speeding plus everything he can think off (including your glasses)
4. Profit?
 
Its illegal in a lot of states. I doubt you will win.
 
I don't know why everyone is screaming "BS" when you weren't cited for Google Glass. You were cited for speeding (80 in 65 zone) and passing a police vehicle while speeding. Passing a police vehicle while speeding will automatically land you a ticket. The fact that you probably refused to take Google Glass off when asked most likely made him even angrier.
 
+Maurillio Addario I would say 4 be replaced with cry for attention and disway everyone from the fact that she got a ticket for speeding.

Got a ticket for speeding.  Own up to the fact that you either didn't care or you weren't paying attention.
 
Reposting two insightfulls from slashdot:

1:

So wearing something which deliberately obstructs your field of vision, distracts your concentration and defeats your autofocus is considered dangerous?

Seems about right to me.

2:

Not only was she doing 80, but he got her via the "PACE" method. This kind of implies that she wasn't paying much attention, or she probably would have seen the cop car tailing her.

It seems that miss Cecilia got what she deserved and GLASS was indeed factor in that.
 
+Senior Cartman tampering with evidence? I asked her if the officer verified if it was on, or she disclosed its on/off state, that's not tampering with evidence lil' buddy. Presenting the argument it was off, if discovery shows the state doesn't know, would be the #1 defense any lawyer would choose - and isn't lying to the court if it comes from your council. I suggest you inform yourself on such matters before making silly statements and baseless accusations.
 
Self-Entitled Glassholes.  Officer was following the law, maybe you should try the same next time.
 
+Daniel Buchner  The fact that she was driving with it on probably means it was ON. Given that she was also cited for Glass (on top of speeding) means that she refused to take them off when requested. All they need to do is request the Glass for examination. But it will never come to this because guess what, it's a ticket. You either pay up or go to court. And she was cited for speeding. Your HUD argument won't hold any ground because HUD is a DOT approved technology and installed by a car company that undergoes numerous testing and certification. Google Glass never went through all that.
 
+Senior Cartman and everyone else chastising +Cecilia Abadie for speeding: studies clearly show speed alone is poorly correlated with causing accidents. Time-on-road, lane changes, and disproportionate lane-to-lane speed variance are all far more likely to cause accidents. To this point, DOT is testing 85+ MPH speed limits in Texas, and are seeing measurable decreases in accident rates.

If you believe 80 MPH speeding tickets (where the offense is speeding alone) are a generally a good thing that ensures safety, you may have Stockholm syndrome, because the data shows otherwise: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/06/texas_85_mile_per_hour_speed_limit_do_higher_speed_limits_cause_more_accidents_.html
 
GG appears to meet the definition of a device in the citation. I don't see a way out of this, as its not a specifically excluded device.
 
+Senior Cartman luckily the state can't convict you on "probably", can you do the thread a favor: stop making inaccurate assertions and passing them off as anything more than fundamentally flawed opinions.
 
I know some states clearly ban monitors in the view of drivers.  Don't know if it makes sense, but there it is. 
Jim Lai
+
2
3
2
 
Emphasis mine. The law calls out operation in addition to visibility. The implication is that Glass should be turned off while driving under current California law. The other paragraphs detailing exemptions only apply to devices mounted in a vehicle, not devices which are worn. The language is straightforward if interpreted literally.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27602.htm

27602.  (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle if a television receiver, a video monitor, or a television or video screen, or any other similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal that produces entertainment or business applications, is operating and is located in the motor vehicle at a point forward of the back of the driver’s seat, or is operating and the monitor, screen, or display is visible to the driver while driving the motor vehicle.
 
I think it makes sense. The police can't know if the Glass is actually doing anything or not, and if it is, a HUD while driving is of course potentially distracting. I'm not sure why people are so up in arms about this. Just take them off when driving? You can't compare to e.g. a GPS unit, since that's not a HUD.
 
He also got you doing 80 in a 65 zone with the PACE method, is that correct? If so that implies that you also didn't even notice him following you.
 
If "Driving with monitor visible to driver" is illegal, then the Tesla model S and many other cars will have to be taken off the roads.
 
1) Be careful what you post or share in this, or any public forum, because a smart prosecutor will be able to use these statements against you. Even if the statements seem harmless.

2) Even fighting this ticket and winning will do very little in the way of establishing precedent. She needs to lose, then appeal (a much more expensive process), to create good law on this issue.

3) Even so, I highly recommend hiring local counsel to help. These matters are usually handled on a fixed fee basis, and would be very reasonable. You can find a good criminal defense lawyer through the NACDL, or call an attorney you trust for a referral.

http://nacdl.org/impak/cms/members_online/members/findalawyer.asp
 
+Charles Heitz As stated above, some laws clearly state if the product is 'built in' to the car, then it is legal; if not, illegal. 

I think it is worthwhile revisiting these laws, but the law to me seems to be pretty straight forward. 
 
Did you take that photo using Glass?  It's a pretty crappy camera if so.
 
On a technical note, Google Glass could be made indisputably legal with an app that disables all apps but the GPS, maps, and vehicle info display. The app should be called "California 27602(5)(B)".
Jim Lai
+
5
6
5
 
Letter of the law, not the ticket. A HUD is installed in vehicle and can therefore fall under an exemption under paragraph 27602(b)(1). A HUD that is worn on the person does not meet the criterion.
 
You should contact Denise Howell of This Week in Law on the TWiT.tv network for them to cover it
 
+Petr Prokop if her Glass device was off, it's no different than wearing sunglasses - they need to prove it was on.
 
Somebody mentioned:
>  The problem here seems to be that there is no way he could know what was displayed at the time.

Solution? Always record what's on camera and what's on the display simultaneously.
 
+Cam Meadows I live in NY and the pigs (I mean cops... Yeah right) also drive around with laptops running visible to the driver. Aside from that, almost all +NYPD officers I've seen are driving while on their phone (calls, texting, etc) without any reprimand, yet when civilians do that, we get traffic violations/tickets/suspended licenses. It makes no sense.
+Cecilia Abadie fight this thing tooth and nail. Wearing Google glass vs using Google glass while driving are two completely different things!!
The law also never took into account that technology would catch up and find itself in cars. All new cars come with GPS/Nav/Radio TOUCHSCREEN systems, plus all other controls which are touchscreen based. How come car manufacturers aren't reprimanded for cars produced with distractions already built in them. 
 
Idiots. If its off then don't ware it, if you where Google glass and drive over a child then what ? Prove it was off then 
 
if you think you can concentrate on driving wile using a computer you need to take a big break from being on-line its dangerous distracting and totally un-necessary you dont need to be using glass when you should be concentrating on driving one distraction at the wrong time could cost a life just be sensible and take them off when driving there is no reason to be using them behind the wheel at all
 
Just wondering - were you cited by CHP or San Diego PD?
 
And if it's off then why have this discussion just take them off drive to your destination and put it back on
 
Well most new cars have a monitor visible to the driver. Not only are they handling navigation, radio, but instrument panels are also monitors. The law when created didn't take into account that technology would be changing. Also the officer has no proof that your display was on or not. He made an assumption without any evidence. There are also eye glasses that are going to be coming out with the technology soon. What are they going to do start ticketing people for wearing prescription glasses also. Not to mention the dickhead of cop had at least one monitor visible in his car also. My suggestion is get a lawyer and contact google about it they may want to way in since this could effect their product marketing. Then put a boot in the cops rear in court.
But so you know per the law yep its illegal http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27602.htm
 
+delano zuurman If it is off it is utterly irrelevant that you were wearing it, it does not obstruct your view of the road.  And if you really want to prove a device is off all you need to do is check the logs, they get rolled over eventually but can provide proof of when a device is off and on.
Also stop using children to add an irrelevant emotional component to your argument.
 
+Cecilia Abadie If you have a paypal I'd pitch in some cash to help you fight this and I'm sure others would too.  Establishing a precedent is very important and I'd recommend getting a lawyer and collecting donations to pay for them.
 
I love how people skip the comments before commenting. She said early on she thought it was a 75 zone. I don't slam on my brakes when under a cop behind me so why would she. Ibhave also had a cop tailgate me when doing 80 in a 75 and fly past me when I changed lanes.

Also the PACE method doesnt take more than maybe a minute or two. Can you tell me who was behind you on your way to work today?

There is a lot wrong with this situation.. everyone involved is in the wrong. I can have my phone in my cup holder and the screen off but the second someone texts and the screen turns on, it's now illegal. There is no way having GG on is any different from sunglasses or corrective lenses. The obstruction is not in a direct line of sight. If this were the case, then wouldnt bifocals be illegal? .... It's a stupid case, easy to fight, and has not a single bearing on future GG cases...

Good luck in court!!! I hope you cone out on top only because I hate cops and courts.. haha
 
+Daniel Buchner What about Glass user comming up with excuse for it still being worn if it is off?

People do get tickets for just holding phones. Rightly so.

If they didn't get ticketed, there would be huge gray zone where people can be sneaky about using their tech.
 
+Richard Boyd Is there an additional fine/points for wearing the glass on top of the speeding then? I guess this would be more cut and dry if the only offense listed was wearing Glass
 
I guess you didn't realize you were speeding. Maybe that is a good indication you shouldn't have it on while driving.
 
+Cecilia Abadie I'm very much two sided on this, I love the tech involved with Google Glass and love the brilliant uses, But how will you be able to fight this in court, How were you using Glass when you were driving? 
 
Create a "Go Fund Me" campaign to raise money to fight this in court with a proper attorney. There are enough people in the U.S. that support your point of view, you would quickly raise a significant amount of money and this issue would get the proper hearing it deserves. 
 
+Osamah Anjum If you take a look at the CA law in question it has specific exceptions for vehicles operated by police, utility companies, etc.
 
Nice of you to leave out speeding, the initial infraction.
 
+Masa Jow it's there, I'm not hiding it, ther's nothing very interesting about a speeding ticket, most people have had one ... so it just not the point that. I'm very open and I have talked about traffic infractions before on my TEDxOrangeCoast talk. 
 
I don't know about the law, if there is one about this or not, but I drive a car that has a heads-up display that projects onto the windshield. I am essentially looking at a display monitor all the time that is a factory made built in feature. Since Google Glass is providing a heads-up display, what is the difference? Fight it!
 
No, you got pulled over for speeding and then also got a ticket for wearing Google Glass while driving. I like how you completely glass over that fact.
 
I can't see GG being allowed while driving - for the same reason that you shouldn't be yapping on a mobile/cell phone while driving.  As soon as they roll out the argument "It /might/ cause a serious distraction..." you've lost (and it's far worse than a phone sitting in a drink holder as you can't get away from the display).

More importantly, what the hell is everybody smoking thinking that this should be allowed?  Put your thinking caps on and you will realise that allowing* GG (or similar products) to be used while driving will cause utter chaos.  There are more people out there who can't drive WITHOUT any form of distraction - do you really think allowing these kind of people to drive with GG is a good idea?

* if an action is allowed more people will do it, yes people still drive when using a mobile/cell but far more realise it's a no-no and don't do it.
 
+Richard Boyd you bring up a very important point. This is the second time it happens to me not to know in which are I am and it might totally just be me, but I honestly don't see this signs very clear when I'm on a new road, or specially on a new part of a road and I assume it's the same speed as other parts of the road. I actually would love to see an app that lets me know at all times the speed limit changes in my Glass.
 
it's amazing that the officer wrote out "Google Glass" by product name. That's like if someone were drinking and driving and he wrote... "driving while drinking a can of Budweiser"
 
Hate to say it, but based on the wording of the law, it seems like he has a point.  Whether or not a judge would agree is still a question.
 
+Cecilia Abadie The speed limit idea is a great idea and can be accomplished however will require you to have GPS turned on on your phone and will be a battery drainer.  I suppose it could be done with the fused location provider in Android but that would cause a bit of lag if it were coming from the phone and a great deal of lag if this info were coming from Glass.  OH and yeah, I've already been thinking about this a bit.
 
I hope you get fine doubled in court. This should be and is already made illegal in some states and countries. Your eye should be on the road, not checking crap on the glass.
 
The most important two words in the law: "is operating". A distinction should be made between whether Glass "is operating" (active) or is not being used (standby).

You can have a television sitting in your front seat pointed right at you so long as the screen is blank.
 
+Andrew Beard well then that's a problem with the law. You cannot have exceptions, if there is a law that bans use of "monitors while driving, it should apply across the board. Just because someone is a pig doesn't make them exclusive and thus able to bypass the laws
 
These things are hideous invasions of our collective privacy. Burn, burn, burn 
 
oh wow!!! +Cecilia Abadie !! I've worn mine a few times while driving...so far no ticket.
..I'll have to investigate further and see what we can do our end  for you....
 
I can't speak for CA, but in South Carolina you can not have a monitor visible to the driver while the car is in motion.  This "monitor" includes DVD players, laptop's, etc.  Technically mobile phones fit this classification but apparently GPS is permitted.
 
"Do not drive a vehicle equipped with a video monitor, if the monitor is visible to the driver and displays anything other than vehicle information global mapping displays, external media player (mp3) or satellite radio information..."

"That law is amazingly ambiguous. If this law is enforced for Glass then that means nobody can drive a vehicle with a phone, tablet or GPS mounted in front of the driver as they can all be made to show video."

As per the law, if the Google Glasses were showing ANYTHING other than car info, location info, or media controls, then it would be deemed illegal. I have the cops side on this, though I do wonder at his cause for the stop. I mean, a TV can be sitting in my front seat, but it needs to be off. The ability to show video is different than what is displayed. While this is obviously a first for this type of situation, I believe that this will set the legal precedent in California as well as other states.
 
maybe he was just welcoming you to america +Cecilia Abadie ;)
p.s. handsfree, not on, not blocking vision ... case dismissed!
 
Legal or illegal shouldn't matter. Nobody should be using a device like Glass while driving any more than you should be checking your smartphone for texts. That should be common sense.
 
It is a distraction, how many people must die before a Law is put into place?
 
We already have idiots talking to themselves now we're starting to have idiots talking to themselves and staring into abyss 
 
By the letter of the law "monitor visible to driver", it's illegal in your state.  That display COULD show "entertainment or business applications", therefore it's in violation.

Complaining about the law to a judge won't matter - you need to get the law itself changed to reflect modern times.  (Because having a smartphone on a windshield or dash mount would also be a violation, and that is extremely common now.)
 
+Brendan Dillon you obviously know nothing about glass.  Your comparison is flat wrong. 

Glass is far safer than any other means of information delivery.  It is out of your view and not distracting.

Navigation even leaves the screen off most of the time. Speed, MPG RPM literally any form of information you get in your vehicle in most modern vehicles REQUIRES you to take your eyes off the road.  With glass you could get the  same info and never look away, not even for that split second to check your speed.

Not only are you wrong but IMO you have it backwards.  People should be encouraged to drive WITH Glass on.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the ticket reads that you got stopped for speeding.  Having Glass on was just another violation.
 
+Lee Brewer that is correct and I know in my state that means it will be dismissed if you accept the speeding ticket nearly 100% of the time.
 
Um, you might get the judge to buy throwing out the monitor charge, but not for 80 in a 65 zone....
 
Everyone talking about precedent makes me laugh.  I seriously doubt anything changes.  The judge is simply going to dismiss this foolishness and charge her for the speeding.

If this were in my state I wouldn't even have to go to a court house, I would call an attorney, pay them ~$100 get the speeding ticket deferred (or take defensive driving) and have the Glass ticket dismissed.  Total would cost me about $200, nothing would be on my record and all the Glass haters and holes can go home and sleep soundly.
 
+Lee Brewer I am currently driving so I cannot reply to this because if I do I'll be breaking the laws of the road. 
 
Definitely not a glass hater.....even had an offer to be given in invite......just don't have the funds.
 
I'm bummed.  I figured I'd be the first to get one of these for Glassing while Driving.
 
+Aaron Kasten Glass is out of your view... until you look at it. Just like a smartphone or tablet and then it's just as distracting. Checking Speed, MPG, etc does require you to take your eyes off the road for a split second, and those are pieces of information you need to drive your car. You don't need any of the information you are getting from Glass.

"People should be encouraged to drive WITH Glass on."
That's the most insane and asinine thing I've seen anyone say in weeks. It's actually frightening. Thank God you don't have a say in this.
 
+Cecilia Abadie I may have something for you to get advice for your ticket, send me an email darlene.wallach@gmail.com 
ryan kuba
+
1
0
1
0
 
This is not ridiculous and you are all being absurd. Our society has progressed to believe it is somehow OK to multi task while driving. When you are driving a car you should be concentrating on driving with your hands at 10 and 2. You are operating a weapon that can kill people. Most countries don't have this problem, as we all think Driving is a right and not a privilege. 1 million+ cell phone accidents per year and 11 deaths per day related to texting while driving.

I have no idea why something like drinking and driving has been demonized while an act that is just as dangerous is OK because everyone does it.

Google glass is a cell phone and you should not be staring at it while driving. Concentrate on driving people!!!!
 
+delano zuurman luckily our justice system operates in exactly the opposite direction: the State must prove you committed the crime accused. Are you seriously suggesting we make prosecution of crime a matter of guilty until proven innocent? How can you even utter such lunacy? #FacePalm

Empirically speaking, Google Glass is nothing more than a dorky pair of sunglasses when in the off state. +Cecilia Abadie needn't prove the device was off, the State must prove it was powered on - that's not an opinion, it's basic jurisprudence people.
 
What if you wear the Google glass while you are a driver in Google Self-Driving Car ?
hahaha ..intresting
 
It's distracted driving, plain and simple.
 
+Brendan Dillon lol you are an idiot.  Glass absolutly provides relevant information while driving. Currently navigation is all that is available. CURRENTLY! People are actively developing for this tech, more functionality will come.  But there is a use case for driving with glass.  your comments only further prove how ignorant on this subject matter you actually are.

Now let's be realistic. Most people, when they receive a notification to their phone even while driving still check it.  I am not encouraging this behavior and a Glass driving app should disable such notifications.  However we're talking about real world behaviors.  Most people check those notifications.  I would certainly prefer a glance at a clear screen or actually tilting the head down slightly so you can actually look through glass to see the notification and still see the road. That's right you could see that text message while still seeing the road.  No fumbling around in the seat next to you or looking in the cup holder to find your phone, then lifting it up and taking your eyes completely off the road to read it.  So again Glass while in that case would certainly be breaking the law, is WAY safer than what is common practice.  I am not implying that reading texts through glass is suddenly somehow safe  but it is better than what most people currently do.

Also because there is no text input with Glass there is no distracting option to attempt to reply, other than through voice actions.

Please continue to provide your expert input on a matter you so clearly know nothing about.

I love when people pretend to have some ordained knowledge about a device they have obviously never used.
 
I vote for the abolition of personal vehicles, to be replaced by a system of ondemand self-driving electric cars! Texting while driving and glass while driving are dangerous, but most assholes can't even come to a complete stop at intersections or use your turn signals. People around here use the shoulder as a lane. Riding a bike or walking is quite dangerous itself. Why? Because people's sense of self importance is so inflated they feel they couldn't possibly wait half a goddamn second or get themselves prepared in a timely manner in the first place. You need to speed down the highway while wearing glass and think it's some sort of inalienable human right? There is some serious stupidity in the Information Age. Just pay your goddamn ticket and accept that you were being irresponsible.
 
Cars are deadly implements that require your full attention to operate. By distracting yourself with whatever device, you are running the risk of causing serious injury or death. It really is that simple and something people seem to forget.
 
Not sure about legality, but safety while driving with Google Glass is definitely up for debate. Here's a prof doing research on it so he can advise lawmakers and insurance companies: http://bizj.us/sq1id
 
+Jeff Bond thanks for the snark. Is it because you can't think of anything meaningful to say?
 
It's hard to read your ticket, but it seems you got a ticket for speeding. and the cop only added "while wearing glass".
Is that incorrect?

If you are being cited for wearing glass in addition to speeding, I recommend you contact the NMA: http://www.motorists.org/contact/
They are there to help you and me fight abuses like this.
Note that you're supposed to be a member before you ask them for help :) but it's not too late too join now, call them, and explain your unusual situation. I'm guessing they may be interested in helping you fight this to set the right precedent (on the "while wearing glass" issue).
This is of course not going to help you for a speeding ticket if you were indeed speeding, and I'm also assuming you weren't reading Email while driving :)
See also http://www.motorists.org/fightticket/
If you can't get help from the NMA, Geo is also from california and has great resources to help: http://www.helpigotaticket.com/index.html and http://www.helpigotaticket.com/email.html
 
I have used Glass as it happens and have an invite for the next round of Explorers. However, unlike yourself, I also have common sense. The problem with Glass (or smartphones) while driving, is less a matter of vision and more a matter of attention. They pay more attention to what they're going to say in their next tweet than they do to what is happening on the road.

You, +Aaron Kasten, are obviously special. You think you're too smart/skilled/whatever and you would NEVER speed, miss a turn or stop sign, forget to signal or cause an accident as a result of being distracted because you are just too darned talented. Well, unfortunately, the rest of us aren't perfect and those of us who are sane recognize that people WILL give in to the temptation of having their twitter feed or mobile game sitting right there and that Glass does absolutely NOTHING to make driving safer and introduces far too much opportunity to make it more dangerous. There's a reason that Google is working on self-driving cars, that's because the most dangerous thing about a car is the very human, fallible and distractible driver.

I have no doubt that any judge who heard this would agree that driving with Glass is distracted driving and that Google has the sense to agree and that they will discourage Glass Explorers from using Glass while driving.
 
+Daniel Buchner  the state does have to prove guilt but the police dont have to
To lay charges they have to have probable cause or a reasonable expectation of being able to prove guilt in a court but the cops can charge you without proving anything its the court that convicts the police merely accuse and arrest its the prosecution of a crime that requires the proof not the police who arrest or charge you 
They have probable cause in this case they notice a driver driving erratically above the limit they pull them over to notice they are wearing a computer device that could explain the distraction that caused the infraction of speeding so they charged her its up to her to defend herself in a court the probable cause is clearly there as a basis for the charge.
 
+Cecilia Abadie Where exactly in CA on a public road is there a 75mph speed limit? As far as I am aware, none exist in the state of California.
 
Glass clearly has the potential to be a big distraction while driving.
 
+Jeff Bond so now you are apparently questioning my integrity based on one comment. I'm not going to keep tagging you, but if you don't have something to contribute to a conversation #stfu. Don't tag people and question their integrity without anything to say.
 
+Richard Boyd distraction could have been because she was rockin out to her jam... Does that mean cars shouldn't have radios? Is listening to music a ticketable offense? I don't see something like a pair of glasses as a distraction ... I use my glasses to see personally .. 
 
Doing 80 in a 65 is going pretty fast. Most than what people would normally go 5-10 over usually. He probably equated it to you wearing Google Glass. I think the cop was very much in the right to give you a ticket.

Not illegal to wear while driving, but if going 80 in a 65 could give the cop probable cause.

Ya dun goofed is all I got.
 
Ok you kind of asked for it. If I'm reading this right it seems to say you were speeding at the time you were pulled over. And you need some software to alert you of a speed limit change? It's called a speed limit sign. Maybe pulling off the glass while you drive may help you to read those signs. 
 
my comments:
1. hands free device
2. case closed

+Cecilia Abadie deserves a "speeding" ticket, which she said she accepts responsibility for.

if you're making a case that ALL communication devices be banned from automobiles, that's another issue that relates to more than just +Google Glass 

thats about it +Amish Road Show, have a good day, jeff
 
+Sean Abrams what +Cecilia Abadie said is that some signs are very difficult to read. They might be partially obstructed by trees or simply in an place you aren't looking (I've seen some signs hung on overpasses or bridges that are not "standard" placement). There is an opportunity to use a device like Glass to provide these necessary notifications in a way that isn't distracting, yet is extremely effective.

I have been driving with Glass since I first got the device... IN CALIFORNIA. And, actually, I had a conversation with a motorcycle SFPD officer last week and he didn't say a thing to me.

#DrivingWithGlass
 
Well thank you for clarifying +Jeff Bond. I don't agree, but that's a bit more insightful.

I'm not calling out glass, it's a very interesting advancement in technology. I just question other people's ability to control themselves while driving. I watch people drive like idiots everyday. If they can't even handle ordinary driving, how can they handle multi-tasking, hands free or not.

I was being sincere in my desire for technology to advance to the point where we no longer control the vehicle. There is always the possibility of algorithm failures, but I think we will soon be able to rely on that much better than people's subjective judgement calls. It's particularly rough when life is lost due to someone else's over confidence in themselves. 
 
A radio monitor is visible, as are your environmental controls, your dashboard, your GPS. I'd fight that and record the court date with Glass.
What state?
 
It does seem to me that the major arguments are if the glass screen is considered "in the view" of the driver, and if there was any way for the officer to determine if it was on or not. Expect that to be verified via connection records / digital forensics, should it actually become a big issue - which I would doubt, for a traffic ticket.

I was just reading about a police officer in CA who gave out record numbers of tickets to folks for texting / using phone based GPSs while stopped at a stop light.

It does seem clear, by the way the law is written, that even using a cell phone GPS, with the screen on, is illegal, so using nav on the glass would also be illegal. Only dedicated GPS units are exempt (along with the police with their computers, and various utilities with theirs, clearly spelled out in the law).

There certainly is a disconnect going on in the law. I personally am all for ticketing various distracted driving things (texting, etc.) as studies have clearly shown them to be dangerous. I think GPS are good, but trying to update/interact with the GPS while driving is most likely distracted driving (not sure on voice command, etc.), and phones currently don't lock you out of doing that like built-in units can.

In any case, it seems clear that the law needs revision to keep up with the tech, but the tech may also need revision to keep up with safety.
 
+Cecilia Abadie you should ask +Google, +Google Glass, and +Vic Gundotra to maybe step in and help ya out.. Also have a few other Glass users come to the court with you and dona Live +Hangout you could even use the new promote feature and get a bunch of people to watch live!!

Also +Cecilia Abadie look for an app that has a GPS speedometer and set it to pop up an alert on your glass when you travel over the speed limit to help slow you down Lol

Good Luck!!! 
 
If you are allowed to have a GPS in your car, for which you have to look away from the road to that screen, then a Google Glass screen (in the sense of a navigation screen) can't be illegal.
 
You are wrong in this one honestly. You can compare it all you want but a GPS is place on your dash, yes you have to look away from it but you can also put it on turn by turn direction on voice. Google glass is just in your face there. You can fight it but it still poses for a distraction so odds of you winning this is slim. I mean come on you were speeding...so your chance of it winning just got slimmer...the arguement that will be use against you in court is well ya, you were distracted by your google glass lol
 
+Madina K. you obviously haven't used Glass for navigation. It is also fully audible. You don't need to look at the display at all. Glass is not at all "in your face"... you have to look up to see it, otherwise it's not at all in your field of vision.

Also... committing one crime IN NO WAY makes you "more guilty" of another. Speeding and wearing Glass are completely unrelated in this situation. Are you trying to say that if she wasn't wearing her seatbelt it was because she was wearing Glass?
 
So let me get this right... its ok for a cop to look at his laptop monitor in his police car?  I think you have a case to fight it. good luck!!!
 
I offered my local police dept. a demo of Glass, JUST so this kind of silliness doesn't happen. Funny, they never called back. 
 
+Steven Mautone Of course I haven't. But I know unlike my gps, I can record on it...I can chat on it, I can record video on it, I can do what was it? camcording? I can listen to music, I can blog on it....

She had on her google glass, who are we to say she wasn't doing one of those in the court of law? Right, exactly

Obvioiusly you are a fan boy. We are talking about how this will play out int he court of law. Do i want a google glass? yes. will I wear it while driving? yes. Will I be speeding while driving with it? fuck no
 
+Ed Stumpff Yes, because cops receive specialized driver training... just as why a cop can carry a firearm in public. Training!!! 
 
Google needs to help her fight this. +Google Glass and future of innovation is on the line here!
 
There's no law that says that you can't use google glass while driving, well I don't know the laws in California. In Ontario, Canada the law only applies for mobile phones or devices that can disctract the driver. Glass is a Hands-Free device that uses voice commands and doesn't interfere with the driver, so I think the police officer was wrong.
 
Anything, and I do mean ANYTHING that could potentially distract a driver from focusing his or her attention to the task of safely operating a motor vehicle, should be ILLEGAL. This includes texting, Google Glass, eating, reading, or what have you. Take the silly Google Glasses off and just drive. You can always put them back on when you arrive safely at your destination.
 
+Tomas Camacho Exactly tomas but people do not want to understand that. They do not want to understand once you have associated yourself with distraction that is it. Do I do it? yes I do but I also know that if I get caught I may not like the result because I know its wrong. I take full blame on that not the police that pull me over.

Google glass is not big yet, once it become completely available for everyone we will see what the law says wont we :)
 
+Madina K. in the United States you are innocent until proven guilty... not the other way around. The burden is on the police to prove she was using it... she doesn't have to prove she wasn't.

I, personally, believe +Cecilia Abadie that she was not using it at the time.
 
the cop is right. California enacted a rather draconian law aimed to prevent drivers from watching video while driving. It bans any video display of any sort in the front seats of an automobile except for factory installed screens for navigation or automobile controls and information (infotainment systems).  The law pretty much pre-dates smart phones and, if taken literally, would ban a front seat passenger from using a smartphone, even if only being used to make a call.

Clearly, Google Glass is a violation of this law and is really a violation of the intent of the law, too. You should not be watching a movie while driving and there is no way to tell what, if anything, you are watching when wearing Google Glass.
 
+Richard Boyd they do not ... But they will one day soon.

And you are aware that Google glass is above your line of sight right? You don't look through it. Just like bifocals sit below your line of sight. Bifocals are just as much of a distraction as GG when powered off...

I bet you drive with two hands on the steering wheel at all times and pull over to turn on your heat or a/c right?


 
+ashley bateson she wasn't written up for distracted driving, that is irrelevant. If the officer didn't ascertain the powered state of the device at the time of the incident, or present in court evidence to prove it was on, she can move to dismiss that infraction (not the speeding infraction) and it should - per the burden of proof - be dismissed. The cop of course could lie and say he checked the device to see if it was on, but that's another matter.
 
Lets go ahead and outlaw looking around other than mirrors, and rolling down windows, looking at gauges, controlling climate controls, or watching pedestrians while we are at it. They could all prevent auto accidents.


 
As something liable to distract you from what's going on in front of you on the road, I would suggest that Glass is high on the list. While the laws may be ambiguous the intent is clear: to prevent people using devices that would distract them, increasing the chance of an accident. Even if you're not using Glass actively while driving, you have placed something in your immediate field of view that has the potential to distract. I'm not going to go so far as to say it's irresponsible, but more research is needed before you all get butt hurt over getting a ticket.

p.s. I've seen first hand some really bad accidents actually take place before my eyes on the highway, like cars exploding into scrap metal when a truck ploughs into them bad. I'd rather cops are verging on the side of caution and applying the law possibly too strictly.
 
I don't think the benefits of having Glass on outweigh the risks. It is a potential distraction and I don't think it should be allowed while driving.
 
+Michael Durwin nope not a dick post. Just a point that she triggered the Glass being added onto her ticket because of her speeding. 
+Steven Mautone that is a piss poor excuse. The only reason why she wouldn't see the sign is because she was distracted by the Glass and was doing 15 over the limit. Eyes on the road people. We live in an age where technology is distracting. Now the thing I would like to see is Driving while eating, applying make up, shaving, and etc. be ticketed. We are on the road for a simple reason and one only, to get to a destination. We are responsible for others lives on the road. It's cool if you want to crank your tunes and rock out but, do so responsibly. Need directions to the next gas station? Just have the GPS out of sight and pull over to enter a destination. 
Look folks, I love technology as much as all of you do and  Iwould like to mess around with #GoogleGlass  one day but, we all have to be responsible. Distractions and Driving do not mix.  
 
If only you were an illegal immigrant they would have let you off  with a warning and provided you a free drivers license.  Fight it, how do they know it was on? and maybe it had google maps up? they have no way of knowing.
 
+Steven Mautone Well of course, I believe she wasn't either but you and I both know our law is fucked up...do not turn blind to that one too. She could fight it and raise awareness thats it. Anything that distract you from driving should be outlaw. My friend was kill because someone was checking a notification on their phone. Dude was not talking, he was checking a notification he received....something we all do on a daily basic. But it remains, you get caught with a phone other than a handset you can get a ticket. Even those should be ban but we want to give our human n.ature a leeway. 

She can argue this till she's blue in the face but end of the day its a distraction. Yes even gps are distractions and I am sure if you look in the news you will find somethign about an accident caused by GPS (which is legal as far as a I know). Google glass is in the same boat here fella

If she did not have on google glass she would be cited for speeding. Next time she get pull over, let her take off the google glass before the police officer get to her car...its that simple! 
 
+Drew Darrow
If only there was some way in which law enforcement could request the records from an electronic device that is suspected as having been used in the commission of a crime. if only.....
 
+Ricky McMaster
Fuzzy dice are 'above your line of sight' too, still illegal. There is no law mandating both hands remain on the wheel at all times, unlike the laws against having a screen mounted inches from your face.
 
google does not need to help fight this .
There is no reason to use google glass while driving therefore you cant argue you have a right to do it
You are not injured by not using it you are not put out by having to concentrate on just driving when behind the wheel
 The company wont help they know its not a device that should be used when driving a motor vehicle 
To read anything on Glass you need to look up its a refocus the road is not in the top part of your vision so its distracting to use while driving . Its not even something the courts will argue its common sense you cant use a computer while concentrating on driving its a distraction you cant read emails you cant read twitter or post on G+ you cant watch a movie you cant use a video screen of any sort apart from the cars nav system if it has one,
 If your driving and have an accident google will not help you because you were wearing glass they will not back your right to play with a computer while your driving its totally irresponsible 
 
This is why many jurisdictions are adding "texting" to the list of banned activities while driving...

"Oh, but Your Honor, I wasn't "talking" on the cell phone, I was texting on the cell phone."

Now along comes Google Glasses which will further test the limits of a law designed to protect motorists and innocent pedestrians from distracted drivers...

"Oh, but Your Honor, I wasn't "watching" anything on my Google Glasses, I only had them on so I could look cool."

Take the silly Google Glasses off when you drive and try to FOCUS on the task of driving instead of trying to "look cool" and claim you weren't using them.
 
I was been caught for speeding while using Maps on Google Glass three months ago, the day I picked up my glass. But I was lucky that cop didn't know what's google glass that time. He was aware I was wearing strange Glass, and asked about it, I said it was google glass, but I didn't tell him I were tuning Map on. lol. I always using glass while driving, hope you can beat this ticket! 
 
+Kevin Oberman I wonder why one would assume that someone wearing Glass while driving would be watching video? They might be making a phone call, using the built in turn by turn directions or merely using them as sunglasses.
So I'm assuming the same law bans after-factory nav systems like Garmin or hands free phone calls?
 
Google Glass Terms of Use clearly state...

Google Services

When you use a Glass device or any Google software or services through your Device, your use is subject to the applicable terms and conditions for those services, including the Google Terms of Service. (For example, your use of any Glass software or services that use Google Maps is also subject to the Google Maps/Earth Additional Terms of Service and Legal Notices, and your use of any navigation features is subject to the following navigation disclaimer: Please keep your eyes on the road and obey applicable laws. Do not manipulate this application while in motion. Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, not suitable, or prohibited. Data is not real-time, and location accuracy cannot be guaranteed).

If you wear 'em while driving it can be safely assumed, and any judge will agree, that you were most likely "using" them thereby shifting the burden of proof that you were "not using" them onto you.

Take the silly Google Glasses off when driving.
 
For those saying you have no reason to use Glass, keep in mind the map feature. Is it more distracting to glance up and view a transparent nav system or to turn your head 30 degrees away from the road to view a nav system? 
 
+. Shannara I love your comment lol cause end of the day thats what it comes down to. If she wasn't speeding, we wont be here posting lol


Those going google glass is not in your face, stop lying to yourself. 
 
Get a lawyer, fight it, and see what happens. This case could be very important for the future of #googleglass . I'm interested to see the outcome.
 
+Tomas Camacho The officer has to prove that a law was broken at the scene of the crime. That's how it works. The judge can't just say "PROVE YOU WEREN'T DOING WHAT THIS COP SAYS YOU DID".

An officer shouldn't be able to assume that someone is doing something (IE, looking at non-navigational data on Google Glass) and ticket them on your assumption. Supporting this is suggesting that you think that officers should be able to ticket without providing proof.

Your obvious bias against Google Glass doesn't help the conversation, either.
 
+Dan Baran  Thanks for that link.  I found it a very interesting read.  Unfortunately for Ms. Abadie, the particular clause cited does state a few things that exempt her Google Glass.  1)  The device in question needs to be installed in the vehicle to some degree.  Wearing it isn't mounting/installing.  2)  "(B) The equipment is designed, operated, and configured in a manner that prevents the driver of the motor vehicle from viewing the television broadcast or video signal while operating the vehicle in a safe and reasonable manner."  As far as I know, there is no ability built into google glass to disable all non navigational/GPS functions while the car is in motion.
 
I think Google Glass is better and safer compare with the big laptop that officers have in their cars!
 
It sucks that you got the ticket, but it's good that the officer stopped you for wearing something that could be interfering with your ability to drive safely.  The last thing I want is for some clown wearing Google Ass to drive down my street and plow over kids because they were too busy reading Fifty Shades when they should have been paying attention to the road.
 
For those who don't think Google Glass usage cannot be proven, consider that if you're engaged in an accident then your subscription records could be seized and clearly prove that you were indeed, using Google Glass at the time of said incident. Take the silly Google Glasses off when operating a motor vehicle.
 
In 1995 I was kicked out of a concert for having a cell phone.  The argument was the then-new digital phone transmissions were good enough I could be remotely recording the music.  Imagine that happening in 2013.  I see personal HUDs in the same way...mostly misunderstood now, but with incredible potential to change the world for the better.
 
+Madina K. if you go that route in your analysis then everything is a distraction. The dudes spinning signs for local businesses on the side of the road, your baby crying in the back seat, or even that itch on your foot that you might really need to scratch. We can't outlaw distractions

+Sean Abrams, thanks for your opinion. I'm guessing signs are easier to read from up on top of your pedestal. Down here on Earth some signs are not always in the most optimal location.
 
Glass is far safer than anything else that has a display that's legally allowed in your car. This incident reminds me of stories of science being called witch craft in the good ol' days. 
 
Maybe he knows how much an Explorer Edition costs and thought you'd just pay the ticket rather than deal with it?

I've seen that a lot from police. Targeting people who they think won't fight it. I always do, except for that one time when it actually was me in the wrong, and I've paid one ticket in my entire life.
 
+Steven Mautone I never said they weren't distracting. If i choose to stare at the dude spinning signs at a local businesses I WILL get in an accident. I don't have a baby and if I did but they start crying, I'm sorry the love of my life, I need to find a place to pull over before I can attend to you since you know, I DO NOT WANT TO KILL US BOTH. And yes that itch at my feet is distracting, Why I look frantically left and right and slow down so I do not get in an accident. And if it is extreme, unlike some people I have pull over to the side of the road to take care of shit. We can't outlaw distraction but if you CHOOSE to get involve with the distraction that is all on you. If she cause an accident because of google glass and they can prove so I will gladly have my tax be use to keep her of the road. 

She CHOOSE to keep google glass on her face while driving. What was so important for her to keep it on? Does it kill her to take it of and drive? I saw her google plus...was she blogging? It seems she does everything with google glass. If I choose to stare at the spinning sign, or leaning over to attend to my crying baby WHILE DRIVING or not pulling over because the crying baby is driving me crazy or allowing that itching foot to distract me to the point that I cause an accident. Throw me in jail and throw away the key. I welcome it. 
 
+Aaron Kasten GPS Units are legal - Cell phones running GPS software are not.  Monitors (laptops) can be legal in some areas, but only if they're for mapping software.
 
I dont think it should be illegal to drive with Google Glass, but I think it is incredibly irresponsible to use them while driving and wearing it alone while driving is at the least, asking for trouble. In the worst case scenario you are tempted to use it and cause an accident. In the best case scenario you never use it (and therefore have no reason to wear it) and everyone else around you is just distracted wondering if they are being photographed while trying to live their private lives.
 
Hopefully +Google will assist in hiring and paying for the proper legal team.
 
Isn't HUD GPS kinda a major feature of Glass? Seems less distracting than a dash unit to me.

Now if she was in a Hangout it'd be different, but it seems a lot of people responding here don't know what Glass features are.

For me it's California I don't know. I do know that when I went to visit family there they gave me a list of idiotic driving laws to watch out for.
 
+Richard Boyd the problem is there is only 3 states with laws that restrict a screen next to your face... It does not directly sit in the driver's plain sight. But a generalized law is not the answer either. If a state wants the revenue from the tickets, direct a law directly at this device... Banning a display visible by the driver would outlaw most GPS devices, most climate controls, and most dashes today (look at dodge dart, Toyota prius, any car with a HUD, and the Tesla) saying these are DOT approved simply says it safe to be on the road.... Not so much safe for the driver.
 
There's no driving lockout on google glass, so they've got no way to assure that the person isn't twiddling with the glass while driving.
 
+Cecilia Abadie Not to sound like a troll here, but you want software to let you know when the speed limit changes, why not put the cellphone / Google Glass down and pay attention to the road / speed limit signs? Just a thought.
 
+Gregory Pierce Do you hear yourself? "You should watch the side of the road constantly in hopes of seeing a sign once in a while to obtain information you can have in your field of view at all times while receiving instant, audio updates when a variable changes."  <-- You don't see an issue with that? For that matter, why have a speedometer? It's just a distraction and everyone should be driving at a "reasonable and prudent speed" anyway. Yeah, you do sound like a troll.
 
Lmfao sooo absurd. There is no law about about Google glass as of now. Its arguably a safer alternative to a gps device considering your eyes are on the road still versus on a device place awkwardly on the windshield. 
 
Yeah, totally unjust. Well, I don't think this should be limited to drivers :з
 
+Steven Mautone she was on the highway and it clearly states in he CA Drivers handbook:

"The maximum speed limit on most California highways is 65 mph. You may drive 70 mph where posted. Unless otherwise posted, the maximum speed limit is 55 mph on two-lane undivided highways and for vehicles towing trailers."

To say she couldn't read a sign is cop out. She had to take the same level of instruction as you and I had to take to get our license in CA. 

And she can't argue that she didn't see the sign. After doing some research there are plenty of signs on that freeway.

So with a combination of knowledge of the driver handbook and knowing that the I-15 is 65mph in that area. The only time it is 70 close by to where she was pulled over is almost 30 miles north of that location.

A little research goes a long way mate.
 
+Sean Abrams I think you're confusing things. +Cecilia Abadie did not ever say that she couldn't see the sign and she hasn't argued about her speeding. But she did bring up a great point that Glass is a tool that can be used for good implementations. It shouldn't simply be dismissed as a distraction.

I was the one who said that I've missed signs before because of their placement... totally unrelated to this specific situation, but as support for her concept of a Glassware that helps drivers stay informed.
 
arguing google glass could be safer as you could have speed warnings or audio updates is irrelevant they dont offer this service so you cant argue it can be used that way the software isnt available for that yet so its not an excuse to use them while driving the 'advantages 'are all made up ideas of what may happen some day none of its in place no speed warnings no traffic updates the people who use glass are playing with a social network toy not some driving aid
 
+ashley bateson actually +Det Ansinn has built a DriversGlass app. 

And the Explorer Program is full of developers who could hack this together in a few hours... why would we not discuss it's validity?
 
 if they could develop some through that program then great but they haven't done it yet so its no excuse there's no reason to use them while driving 
 
+Cecilia Abadie Just to clarify what happened. You passed a patrol car doing 80 and didn't notice him. He followed you long enough to pace you, which usually takes a minimum of a quarter mile on the highway and you didn't notice him. Now you want to fight a citation in which you need to prove that you were not being distracted by Glass at the time. I hate to break it to you but you will either need to admit that you were distracted and not aware of your speed or you were just driving recklessly (exceeding the speed limit by 15 mph is usually considered reckless). Either way, it isn't going to be pretty for you.
 
Yes +Marty Ballard - I can get anything available in the car's ecu. Speed is easy. Speed limit data could be combined to tell you that your over, but it's also interesting to highlight areas where there may be enhanced enforcement - aka speed traps.
 
i did read the comments and the glass program for driving does not give traffic updates or speed warnings sorry but it doesn't glass is not a driving aid it wont tell you your 15 over the limit you need to be concentrating on driving when you are driving not on your social updates 
 
the law that applies to GoogleGlass is the same one that applies to cell phones:

 "The new Wireless Communications Device Law (effective January 1, 2009) makes it an infraction to write, send, or read text-based communication on an electronic wireless communications device, such as a cell phone, while driving a motor vehicle. "

GoogleGlass constitutes an electronic wireless communications device. The police don't have to prove you were actively using the device to give you a ticket. The fine (for a first time offense) is only $20. If you fight it, you will lose the battle in court and have to pay legal fees and court costs.
 
+Marty Ballard While Dan was out of line with some of his comment, you shouldn't defend what you don't understand. How does someone pass a patrol car without noticing and then not notice he is following for some time if they are not being distracted by something? Something isn't quite right here and I don't think the cop was the issue.
 
+Shawn Conlin I suppose you've never gone over the speed limit?  OH you have!  Well what distracted you to make to exceed the speed limit.  And can you honestly tell me what you know who is behind you every time you drive your car?  If not, what distracted you?  

If you think that Glass was the distraction that caused Cecellia to exceed the speed limit then come visit me and I'll let you drive around with my Glass on.  It is not a distraction.  It just isn't.  Oh it can be, but so can my phone or the radio or the kids.  Anything can be a distraction, if you let it be.  But just wearing Glass is not distracting as it is not on unless the user wants it to be on.
 
Wow you are famous now! And who is Chris Taylor? Hopefully he has your permission to post your story. Anyway, wish I have one of the glasses :(
 
And ok....that Dan person was completely out of line. I flagged his comment.
 
Everyone keeps sending me your story today!  I sure hope this works out the right way!
 
I am very interested to see how this will turn out. Since glass and other rivals are working attaching these to "Prescription" glasses, it might be a nail in the coffin for the tech in some ways. 
At this time, the glass has no use while driving, however, that could change.. and to get ticketed for just wearing the tech... it will be interesting to see.
Also, looking forward to a statement or something from Google about this. Quite possibly they will say nothing, but I would love to hear what they have to say. 

One question I have as well, Did the officer ask what it was, or did he already know it was Google glass?
 
Complete off the wall fantasy question, I know there isn't a way to know this, but does any of his relatives work for Apple? I just wonder.
 
You're on the front page of the LA News website xD
 
Misleading post title, you're ticket is for speeding. Why is the picture so blurry? Smh.
 
Saying google glass is not a distraction is a load of bullshit. Its a screen and it is a distraction. And I have no idea how people see out of the right side with that module hanging down. That there shows your peripheral vision being blocked. 
 
+Marty Ballard Yes, I am guilty of speeding and it was due to a distraction other than Glass. Does that prove she is innocent? unfortunately, no. I can honestly tell you that I am aware of who is behind me. I am also keenly aware of patrol cars on the road. I don't always see them sitting off on the side of the road until I pass them though. 

As far as Glass being active, I suspect that will remain a he said/she said. It wouldn't be wise to state that it was active in a public comment, but wouldn't the office be able to tell if it was on or off based prism. All of the pictures I have seen of people using glass show the display lighting slightly and a small image can be seen. I suspect that given the circumstances, the officer would be inclined to add the monitor citation if he noticed the activity.

Also, I saw a comment from another Glass user that mentioned Glass could activate if she looked up for something. Your statement that it only comes on when the user wants it on seem to contradict the accidental activation option. Which is more accurate?
 
+Shawn Conlin If only....those here defending her can see it through your eyes. You just spelled out reality. Either way she want to fight this it will not look good for her lol. She goes down the root of google glass had nothing to do with her speeding, it was just there to look cool she will be call a rechkless driver, goes on her driver record, if eligible for driving school maybe that can help there.

Or she can take the route of google glass was distracting me (or it wasn't, something else was..oh i was in a hurry, I had to go pee lol) she will still be a reckless driver, still goes on her record, if she eligible for traffic school that may help....

Well I guess that clears things up. Goodluck if you choose to fight it. Regardless, I advice you do traffic school assuming you havn't done so i think with in the last 6 months (forgot the rules)
 
Even when #glass is providing navigation the screen only lights up when a turn is coming up and it also speaks to you in your ear so you really don't even need to look at the prism. Once you complete the turn the display shuts off. Phone GPS nor in car GPS do that. They are always on and always a distraction. I use both and much prefer the minimal intrusion #glass does. I totally agree with +Marty Ballard comments. 
 
After reading a reasonable amount of comments (and I didn't read them all so this might have already been written)  I am not sure people are putting the two violations together.

1. The main reason for the ticket is speeding (80 on a 65mph zone, according to the ticket!) The primary charge always goes on top.
2. The second charge is there to possibly point to a cause for the speeding, in other words a reasonable cop could have asked a question in regards to the reason for the speeding, and concluded that the glass was either active at the time causing a distraction (the actual charge is distracted driving as a result of google glass???). In other words, if the cop asked you, did you notice how fast you were going and you said, sorry officer I didn't see it, could he then assume that Google glass might have interfered with your vision? After all you have just admitted you didn't see it?   I hope that more detail on how the pullover transpired would be given, so that we understand the reason those two charges are together.... the above is opinion, not legal advice. I am not a lawyer, just a guy wondering how the two charges in the ticket might be related?

 My guess is that it really has nothing to do with Glass being active, I think; and more to do with what was distracting you so much that you didn't see your speedometer? A distracted driver is a dangerous driver... typically! :-) 
 
+Cecilia Abadie  the rule is not about "....a vehicle equipped with a video monitor" as you suggested. The rule is "A person shall not drive a motor vehicle if a television receiver, a video monitor, or a television or video screen, or any other similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal that produces entertainment or business applications, is operating and is located in the motor vehicle at a point forward of the back of the driver’s seat, or is operating and the monitor, screen, or display is visible to the driver while driving the motor vehicle."

It seems pretty clear you were in violation of that rule. Now, it is debatable if this should be applicable or not, but you did have a video monitor in the specified location and it was visible to you while driving... the exceptions are all for things installed in the vehicle which Glass obviously is not.
 
I personally see no issue with this. It's just as bad as texting while driving. People need to focus on the road and others around them. Doing anything else while in the road is an endangerment to those around them. If you want to text or surf while driving, wait for a self diving car...
 
+Shawn Conlin Now interpret those laws in the context of a Police "officers" laptop then go find the legal exclusions that allow them to do it and explain how Glass (with it's VERY small and limited display) could POSSIBLY be more of a danger than their systems, or a car stereo for that matter. As usual, this is about NOTHING but generating revenue using insanely illogical law. It makes more sense to ban talking while driving than to prevent someone from using something like Glass to navigate.
 
if you aren't allowed to have a screen on your dash facing the driver, what makes a screen on your eyeball any different? if its the proximity of the device, one can argue that, but i don't see it working. please keep us posted though on the outcome. this is the first I've heard of it.
good luck.
 
Here in the UK we call it 'Driving without due care and attention'. You deserved that ticket. What, you can't disconnect yourself from the internet for the duration of your commute?
 
Are they going to outlaw the built-in heads up display on the windshield of my Chevy Camaro, too? This makes no sense to me!
 
+Justin Lang You ARE allowed to have a screen facing the driver (see dashboard, GPS navigation, car stereo, etc..) The legal issue revolves around what can display a TV broadcast or business application. Of course, the latter entirely contradicts law enforcement systems and ANY kind of GPS device (business application) until the exclusions comes into play. The law against cell phone use (even as GPS) exposes the error in this logic. The Dodge Dart II has a customizable LCD monitor for a dashboard (as I'm sure many high-end luxury cars do too now). The law either needs to either focus on what matters such as better controlling who's allowed behind the wheel, penalizing bad drivers more so that other's have cause to seriously consider their actions OR accept that technology is part of our lives and stop trying to micro-manage things using laws. Who cares if you play with your cell phone while driving? What you care about is when someone causes an accident BECAUSE they were playing with the cell phone (Glass, GPS, stereo, food, children, etc...)
 
I will challenge that ticket as there no evidence that Google glass can effect you driving skills on the contrary it can enhance your driving experience by using Google map navigation. 
 
+Michael-Rainabba Richardson there is no way they can tell if the driver wearing glass is using it for GPS or if they had a video running at the time. stopping everyone to ask is out of the question so they give you the ticket. 
 
Referencing the DMV code mentioned by +Matt Abdou you can claim exclusion based on the following "exceptions" listed on the URL he linked. 

(1) A vehicle information display.

(2) A global positioning display.

(3) A mapping display.

All three are applicable. Please understand, this is NOT legal advice, but rather pointing out what options are in the statute listed in the URL. Please consult with an attorney for actual legal advice.

Please look at the requirements (interlock) 
 
And? There's no way for a cop to tell if I'm watching a DVD on my head-unit while driving. That's not the issue here. The issue is holding people accountable for unsafe driving habits. There are plenty of unsafe, legal things while driving; as if driving itself weren't inherently dangerous. Have you even used Glass or are you just ANOTHER ignorant loud-mouth with an opinion? I HAVE used glass (been to I/O 3 of the last 4 years) and I assure you, it's the LEAST of my concerns on the road. Having a cell phone in the car at all presents plenty of dangers. I'd MUCH rather someone have an interface like Glass designed for highly effective interaction in a non-intrusive manner. Do you propose we outlaw cell phones entirely? OR should be encourage a safer way for them to co-exist with us in a moving vehicle?
 
+Michael-Rainabba Richardson Actually, it is very easy to interpret the difference based on the law since the municipal vehicles are explicitly excluded in the law. My understanding of the reasoning behind this is that the police, and others that are excluded, are trained in their use and to have superior driving ability. Not everyone is trained for high speed pursuit and controlled collisions, like police are.
 
80mph= 130kph (approx) 

Above the MAXIMUM speed limit in much of the US as well as most of Europe. 

The Glass violation was just icing on the cake for the cop.

Since the instructions apparently say "do not use whilst driving", I doubt that the big G would even consider supporting a defence.
 
+Shawn Conlin True. Most people aren't even trained to drive and only must pass some very rudimentary test to do so legally (of course, you can drive without being licensed) so back to my original point, let's focus on the real issue; drivers. NOT "distractions" which are inherent to the task.
 
You need a better image; Get a real camera like a Nikon.  Also, did you get a ticket for speeding also?
 
I never understand why people can't get a good quality picture; even the low-end devices take better pictures like this. If you want to start controversy as such, by saying the ticket was issued purely by use of GG when driving (which it's evident that the reason the police officer pulled you over because you were speeding), at least get a decent picture of the ticket.
 
+Michael-Rainabba Richardson We can agree that issue is the driver. Some people can handle doing several things and maintain control while many cannot. If we are discussing laws in general, it isn't fair that some will be punished for the sins of the others. That doesn't change the fact that if safety is concerned, it is prudent to say that something shouldn't be done if the majority of people are incapable of doing it safely.

I have no issue with not being allowed to play a movie within my field of vision even though I am capable of using self-control to watch the road. I know that too many people would abuse the opportunity if it was allowed and I'd rather not get t-boned by one of them just have the chance to prove I can.
 
Good. Can't people just drive from A to B? What is this insatiable need to text, talk, use google glass while you're driving. I'm glad they're doing this.
 
Cecilia - you're apparently now famous as you just hit CNN too 12 minutes ago. The ticket may have paid itself off with publicity so figure out what you want to promote while you can. :)

More seriously, very sorry to hear that you are "the test case."  Nobody can tell you for sure what will happen the first go round, even though many believe they know what will happen. I think you have a good argument to make regarding how Google Glass is similar to a GPS and other hands free devices. They may dismiss the ticket and, eventually, California will try to pass a law just like many other states have in the works. At that time it will become manifestly clear whether or not these visual tools are permissible.

Best of luck!!!
 
You should be ashamed of yourself, I honestly wish the cop had the power to just take away your license.  You clearly don't deserve it, nor you understand the basics of utilizing it safely.  What makes you so much better than everyone else that you think you can drive distracted?  Way to go, you're going to court to fight for your right to run over kids!  Kudos!  Just tell this community here why you deserve special treatment, and special privileges to put everyone's safety in jeopardy.  Public safety laws are, by necessity, often lowest common denominator Shawn Conlin.  You can't pass laws that are based on people individual ability level, mostly because of little realities like ability levels change, people are deceptive, not to mention that the perceived value of a higheer level of access or allowance promotes deceptiveness.  C'mon people, grow up, realize this stuff is dangerous.  If you don't, you're just too dumb to drive OR wear cyborg gear.
 
1. Don't speed. THAT is why you got pulled over.
2. When the cop is coming up to you, why not just take off the Google Glass? Okay, I get you may want to record, so just turn on record and put them on your dash pointed at you and the window. Problem solved.

But yeah - fight the second charge, they'll likely drop it anyway in return for a guilty on speeding. Though I couldn't read how much over the speed limit you were - they might try to hit you on points because of the situation (they try to charge people with as much as possible in most situations, because they know everything doesn't stick). 
 
Can't believe this happened already, but I think it is incredible how many people have given their two cents and how many comments there are on this post after just 19 hours... Also agree that the outcome of this could be very important and influential throughout the next several years...  Good Luck!!
 
Being the first in America, wish you luck fighting this, and please fight it.  I"m sorry the cop was a dick.  It's likely safer than not.
 
What is Google's stance on this? +Gina Trapani better be careful. +TWIT and Twig will address this. 
 
+Cecilia Abadie I scanned all the posts and could not see one that recognized Google Glass to be as any smart phone. Your local laws notwithstanding, I'd argue in front of the judge that your usage of Google Glass was on par with the usage of any car navigation or heads up display!

Your actual speed is irrelevant! They can prove your speed and charge you on that merit. They can not prove that you were watching non-driving aid information on Google Glass.

Finally, talk to your local lawyers. Given the media noise surrounding your ticket they may take your case for FREE. Don't give in without a fight!
 
You were using / doing something to take  your attention away from the road.  You were (not surprisingly) speeding probably due to that same fact that your attention was on something else.  Do you realize how stupid this looks to complain about a speeding citation when it's clearly written that you were in fact over the posted speed limits (therefore endangering not only your life but anybody else around you) and got a citation because of that?  Get over yourself and grow a brain
 
+N Collins My suggestion was in response to "make it all illegal'. I am aware that people's abilities change. It even changes based on situation. If you really wanted to go down that road, someone with a CDL may not be able to operate a rig under duress. It doesn't change the fact that they can do it legally. The question here is really one of acceptable risk.
 
+Nate Pierce Don't attack people for a difference of opinion. Your aggression is mind boggling.

I have won a speeding ticket for going 35 in a 20 MPH zone. The street looked like a 4 line divided "highway" with a 50+ feet grass median and both sides, and 6 ft wall on both sides!!! Speed limit 20 MPH !!!

This is not even about the 65 MPH limit imposed after the oil embargo... So, don't retaliate with your version of a road rage. You just don't know the facts. Peace.
 
+Nate Pierce honestly, in the beginning, it was a little bit distracting while driving, but it because I was not familiar with glass during the DAY ONE. After two or three days, I felt it was more convenient and safe than using GPS device. The first day when I driving with GPS, I burnt whole tank of gas, because I was not used to GPS.
 
+Chunyong Lin Haha, you just reminded me of the time I got stuck looping around an onramp circle, because it kept readjusting as i crossed over a road, and it had me circling around 3 times before I finally realized what was happening and got out of there.
 
Quiere decir que el officiar le gustó tu gafa de google no tenía más remedio que darte un tique para ver bien de serrca la gafa que tu tenía puesta.
Translate
 
You should known better!!! really.... you say you didn't have it on...who would believe that even if it were the truth. Its crazy that you and others on here thin its okay. Pay attention and drive while not distracted. You should be ashamed of yourself. you actually ask for legal advice??? You shocked, that in itself is amazing to me. Really , the road needs and WE deserve your full attention when you are driving. There's enough issues on the road, don't make it worse. Not sure how old you are but with this action I can only guess:) it sickens me that you act like you are entitled to have the right to endanger me and my children while on the road. And you act like the law is the one with issues??? take a look at yourself. Your actions are irresponsible and out of control.
 
+Sheila Shetty You need to calm yourself. I mean, I do think it may have been a bad idea for her to be wearing as the cop was walking up, but are you telling me you've never used a GPS?
 
when you kill someone then you will think about your actions!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
+Andrij Harasewych lol... so my opinion is every technology has its own side-effect. But it will be benefit lot for our life if we know how to use it properly. Personally, I like Google Glass, and I think it can change something. 
 
I think this is pretty simple. Were you looking at a GPS-type thing on Glass when this happened? If so, then go and tell the judge that. Bring your Glass and show him. I don't have Glass so I have no idea if it even has a GPS app. If not, or you were looking at something else on Glass at the time, then why would you consider the citation unwarranted?
 
That cop needs to ask the right questions. Instead of why are you wearing, ask if you were operating it while driving.

Isn't self-driving cars now legal in California? So somehow that's safer than someone wearing shades with a computer chip on the side that is only with a hand gesture....

The cop thinks you're are careless and speeding. Doesn't understand that this isn't less safe than wearing a bulky set of shades and having a ginormous GPS device on your dashboard with your visor tilted down.
N Collins
+
1
2
3
2
 
+Shiela Sheety +Nate Pierce - THANK YOU!  for having the guts to put these people int heir place, and shame on the rest of you for not condemning this type of irresponsible behavior.  How many of you defenders also say things like "Well, I can text and drive.  It may be dangerous for other people, but not me."  And when you think these things, why?  Do you think you're a better driver?  Do you think you somehow have the right to put others in danger?  What is your rationale for it being ok for you to do something that's proven to be dangerous?  And yes, GPS monitors should be illegal too.  This  +Andrij Harasewych person just freely admitted that they drove around and around an onramp because they were so distracted by their GPS they couldn't look out the windows and see what was going on around them.  Shouldn't be allowed to drive if you are that inept.   +Chunyong Lin freely admits above that driving with Google glass on "was a little bit distracting while driving".  So does a 'little bit' mean enough to kill a kid, or maybe just maim them?  And your description of driving up a tank of gas because you were using GPS?? - seriously people this inept shouldn't be allowed to drive period.  I wonder if Cecilia has kids, and if she does, how she sit with their bus driver wearing Google Glass while driving her kids around. And I'll submit, If she is ok with it, she's just ignorant.
 
You clearly don't understand the concept of Google Glass.

Again, are you people saying you've never used a GPS, or looked at a billboard on the side of the road?

Come on. 
 
+N Collins she said she wasn't operating it. Only wearing it. That's no different than wearing a regular pair of sunglasses!
 
they are just out to get money, crazy
 
Monitor visible to the driver?  Really?  In California?  Easy peas.  Sue the state of California for posting billboards.  Everywhere.  They're plenty visible.
 
did you speed because you were distracted? listening to NPR @ a school zone is dangerous.
 
You probably wouldn't have been pulled over if you weren't speeding. You may not have been speeding if you were paying full attention to the road. Maybe a good Glass app for you would be something that shows you what the speed limit is and the speed you are currently doing. Plus a little arrow that blinks up to your right every 10 seconds so you can check your mirror for the cop using the pace method to determine your speed!
 
Why not just take it off when when driving to focus a bit more? 
 
Hopefully this ticket stands. If you want to play with your google glass in the car, then get a driver. Or better yet , get a google car that will drive for you. Then you can be distracted all you want. But when you are distracted while you're in control of a car, you put other peoples lives at risk.
 
I've never tried glass so maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me it would be incredibly distracting to have it on while driving. If you get a notification your reaction is to look at it. Your GPS system is designed to not be distracting with notifications. I completely agree with the ticket.

We live in a world where more people are dying from driving and texting than DUI's. This is our new reality.

Of course Google is already trying to solve this problem they created by making the car drive itself, so crisis will be averted in a decade.
 
You should of had you're fucking license suspended, consider yourself lucky, I for one hope you are not so fortunate if you do this again.
 
Lot's of omg how dare they comments here. Can people not remove glass? Is it an implant? After all, driving without distraction is quite important. Could the goggles not be put in a box for the duration of the journey?
 
+Martin Pollard you are the most useless person ever, why should people be so addacted that they cant put that thing off ? In this whole discussion not one good reason not to put it off was givin so shut up and stop beign such addicts. And just dont wear glass 
 
+Kevin Hughes people like you are what we need. You are such an idiot. Navigation tells you where to go, although it might be distracting Lets not pretend its like surfing the net, making pictures, calling, watching a movie, looking at this topic and thinking about what kind of a Giant jackass and stupid wise-ass moron you are.
 
Unless you can prove you were only using it for maps or dirctions, I believe you're nailed. Oh, of course, you were speeding too.  
 
Cecelia, you really had it coming to you with this ticket. You were wearing a divice which is VISUALLY distracting and driving is a primarily visual activity. Keep your cellphone off and your GLASS off while driving!  Think of it this way: If you wore your glass and got distracted while driving, then caused an accident, you could be SUED for everything you own.
 
  Lets not be naive she was not using navigation she said that, she had glass on she said that, its illegal to use in ca even as a gps unit you cant have a screen thats not a part of the cars system, that doesnt mean a billboard or anything outside the car the law is clear no monitor that can be used for anything except navigation, glass is not a part of the car and its not a dedicated nav system anyway its a computer therefor its not a relevant or legal system.
 To even argue you should be able to use it is ridiculous its dangerous  its not a needed piece of tech its a god dam toy you do not have a right to play with it while on the road driving  
, Most of us realize its a privilege to have glass not a right and it comes with a responsibility to wear them in appropriate times and places driving with them on is not appropriate 
 
I get pretty upset whenever I see anyone driving with a phone in their hand, so Glass would be no different in my opinion.  I got rear-ended while sitting at a red-light by a jerk going 65 mph and texting... he didn't even hit his brakes before he collided with me.  Two years later, I broad-sided a vehicle that didn't stop for a stop sign... he was talking on the phone and said he didn't see the sign.  Glass, phones, etc. really have no place as a driver distraction, despite the gasps on the earlier posts here.

Further, if you were doing anything at all with Glass during your driving trip besides GPS navigation... I wouldn't push this.  That information can be subpoenaed from Google and given a little media attention, it motivates a DA to do just that.
 
you are an idiot,you got what you deserved.you have to pay attention to your surroundings when your driving.watching your email,and the net while driving.(worse than texting)!...cant it wait until you get home!Just an unbelievbly stupid thing to do.Another stupid idea from "Sergey Brin"....whatta dummy!
 
This made +yahoo on the page when you go it has the slide show news links 5 at a time. It was on there. Sorry you got a ticket, probably the cop just mad they couldn't get a pair
 
"Envy (from Latin invidia) is a resentment which "occurs when someone lacks another's quality, achievement or possession and wishes that the other lacked it." :-)
 
I can always see both my iMID display and GPS at the same time yet don't get tickets for being able to see those "monitors".
 
+Paulus Spernbauer intrestingly an pilots training is nog the same as geting you drivence License. If you legalice glass behind the steer then there will certainly be people that will use it for other stuff while driving, wich is a bad thing
 
+delano zuurman 
I think that's part of the problem with the new "wearables".
1. how can justice prove that I wasn't watching a video while driving (but who's so stupid to do that)?

2. and more important: how can the manufacturers ensure than only relevant informations are provided while driving.
Technically there should be no problem to block certain apps when the GPS detects a speed over xx and a location "on the road"...


I'm looking forward to trying the Scully P-1 but I'm not sure how distracting such a display could be especially on a motorbike...
 
Did anyone else notice that the ticket is actually for speeding? The google glass ding was just a bonus...
 
it should be illegal... as it could distract the driver.   Same as driving with headphones on, but not sure if head phones are illegal while drving.   Good luck to you anyways.   
 
It does not make sense to drive around with your device turned off and still have it on your face. No excuses.
 
Sorry for my  English, but i  don't   think so, that cop should care, what information you got on you display. maybe you got GPS  screen, but maybe you was watching a porno ? I don't say you did, but cop don't know.
but if that will be  legal then people will start use it for a hell lot of stupid things f.e. watch porno, make  business video  conferences,  checking   Facebook, video chatting with  Skype. Would you be happy on the funerals of you  family, which could be  killed by driver, who  video-chatting  with his beloved about dinner, or watching fun videos about stupid car  accidents? 
 
+Matt Abdou How old are you? still teenager?  fighting  just for fight? turn on you brains first, think about little bit. GPS provides driver with information hes only required. and Google Glass is the same as laptop in front of driver
 
I am totally with the CHP officer on this one.  I was hit by someone who was texting while driving last March.  You need to pay attention to where you are going...either drive or play with the computer, not both.  And I don't buy any excuse that you weren't using it.  If you weren't using it, why were you wearing it? I hope you get a HUGE fine.
 
Google Glass has the potential to be a huge distraction to the driver of a vehicle. Even more than a cell phone, and those are illegal when you're driving.
 
Isn't technology great? Sadly it is not a cure for stupidity.
 
Send the bill to Google. They have deep pockets and no morals. You should have been fined. Thanks to the officer that is looking out for our best interest and not only yours. We need more caring people like him in key government positions.
J Moore
 
Maybe it's time to add Navigation to Google Glass?
 
Personally, and although I'm in the minority, I think you deserved the ticket and should count yourself lucky. Distracted driving is a real issue, with real injury done to innocent human beings. If you have a screen visible that you can interact with that takes your attention away from what you should be doing, which is driving, you endanger others. I think your attitude of entitlement on this issue speaks to your essential character...supreme self-centeredness
 
If GG is turned on, it's dangerous to drive wearing it. You should turn the screen off when driving
 
stupid people doing stupid things.  Your own selfishness in wearing these while speeding and endangering yourself and people around you.  What would your defense be if you caused an accident or hit a pedestrian?
 
if it is not a  secret, what you was doing with GG, that it was turned on ?
 
Didn't you primarily get stopped for speeding?
 
I've worn my glass while driving. People who don't own them have no clue what they are talking about. It's less dangerous than looking at a dash mounted gps. Having google directions on glass, I don't have to look away for turn by turn info. A bunch of ignorance being shown in these comments. Expected though, people mock what they don't understand. 
 
ticket or no ticket, this is the problem! for modern life. I think Google should record users use of its glass apps and services, so police can determine that they use useful apps for driving or entertainment or etc. It helps for judgement, in my opinion.
 
+Cecilia Abadie what's the latest news on this?  Has there been any resolution?  Hope you're doing ok with all the attention.  I assume at times it can be overwhelming.  Hang in there!
 
+Cecilia Abadie is it possible for you to get a photo of the inside of a police car, specifically a local one, to show how many electronic screens there are for police to be distracted by? Most have a mounted laptop, digital car readout, GPS. Some may have GPS, radar gun displays, dash-cam displays.
 
Ps +Cecilia Abadie , I was rear ended by a cop when I was 18. She was looking down at her monitor and didn't notice traffic had come to a stop. I didn't get a lawyer, but instead filed the appropriate paperwork to cover just my hefty medical bills. I have always been a do-good-er and didn't want to increase costs for the City. Oh the beautiful irony of life.
 
+Cecilia Abadie , your court date is tomorrow! Good luck with it & I'm sure that all who have posted here are looking forward to seeing the results. :) Too bad I couldn't open any of the links provided by some of the posters. 
 
What is the difference between Google Glass and a Heads up display on the windshield that comes stock in some luxury cars? I personally feel safer having my GPS and other driving data right in my eye piece vs having to look at the dash board for speed, heading or GPS information.  I would never use Glass to text or email while driving as reading can be distracting but thats what stop lights are for. I can quickly respond to a text or an email while stationary at a stop light and then continue to use my GPS while driving. 

It is the uneducated who are going to make the laws that ban something that can be handy while driving. There is even a company developing an app that can sense if a driver is starting to fall asleep at the wheel and sound an alert to keep them awake and gives directions to a near by rest area. 

I hope you fight this ticket and win. Good luck
 
+Yerzhan T +Petr Prokop +delano zuurman +ashley bateson Well guess what folks? The girl won her case by forcing the State (via evidence collected by police) to prove her Glass device was on while she was wearing it, just as I predicted:

"A California woman ticketed for driving while wearing Google Glass, a tiny computer mounted on an eyeglass frame, had her citation dismissed on Thursday by a San Diego court commissioner who said he found no proof the device was operating at the time."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/17/us-usa-googleglass-trial-dismissal-idUSBREA0F1XR20140117

Three cheers for individual liberties!
Add a comment...