We have a similar law in the UK but it does depend on what you mean by public place.

In somewhere like a public toilet block, at least here in the UK, you have an expectation of privacy. If some creep in Meta glasses is filming you take a piss then they are breaking the law.

If you were on a public beach sun bathing then you probably don't have that expectation of privacy.

In most eu countries, you can record in public, but gathering identifying data ("making a database") is strictly regulated, and that includes faces from those photos. You can't even point a security camera at public areas (ie. outdoor camera recording the street infront of your house), because that's enough data to make it a "database".

Some right to record in public may be protected by the current jurisprudence invoking the first amendment, but the first amendment itself obviously doesn't say anything about the right to record in public:

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Private businesses, however, can choose to refuse service for any reason as long as it’s not discriminatory. If enough businesses collaborated to create a “no camera glasses” policy, people might be less likely to buy them. This could keep the market small.

Perhaps a good approach would be to pressure businesses about this. Frankly they probably don’t want pervasive recording of their employees anyway.