Mark Zuckerberg’s entourage threatened with contempt for wearing Meta AI glasses into a no-recording courtroom

An unexpected product placement briefly took the focus off Mark Zuckerberg’s highly anticipated testimony at a landmark social media addiction trial against Meta and YouTube on Wednesday. 

Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl threatened to hold members of Zuckerberg’s entourage in contempt of court for wearing Meta AI glasses, which have the ability to record, CNBC reported. Recording is not allowed in the courtroom. 

“If you have done that, you must delete that, or you will be held in contempt of the court,” Kuhl said. “This is very serious.”

Zuckerberg’s executive assistant, Andrea Besmehn, and another man were seen wearing Meta glasses as they walked into the Los Angeles courthouse. 

At the center of the trial is the question of whether social media companies deliberately designed their platforms to hook young people, and the case’s outcome could affect thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies. The 20-year-old plaintiff, identified by the initials “KGM” or “Kaley,” alleges that she developed mental health issues from a social media addiction. TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff before the trial began. 

Zuckerberg admits to trouble with public appearances 

The plaintiff’s lawyer questioned Zuckerberg over his media training, bringing up an internal document showing how Meta communications staffers have pushed Zuckerberg to appear more “authentic, direct, human, insightful, and real,” and “not try hard, fake, robotic, corporate, or cheesy” in public. 

Zuckerberg denied that he was coached and said that the comments were just “feedback.” 

“I think I’m actually well known to be very bad at this,” he said, getting some laughs. Zuckerberg has long faced mockery and criticism for appearing stiff, robotic, or nervous during his public appearances. 

Zuckerberg doesn’t think addiction ‘applies here’ 

When asked by lawyer Mark Lanier if people tend to use something more if it’s addictive, Zuckerberg answered: “I’m not sure what to say to that. I don’t think that applies here.”

Lanier grilled Zuckerberg about a comment he made during a past congressional hearing, where he said Instagram employees are not given goals to increase the amount of time people spend on the platform. Zuckerberg pushed back against the idea that users’ time spent on the app was a company goal. 

Lanier presented internal documents from head of Instagram Adam Mosseri’s previous testimony that seemed to contradict that statement. The documents said that the company aimed to actively increase user daily engagement time on the platform to 40 minutes in 2023 and to 46 minutes in 2026.

Zuckerberg responded that Instagram previously had time engagement goals but moved away from those targets to focus on utility, given the “basic assumption” that “if something is valuable, people will use it more because it’s useful to them.”

Questions over safety for young users

The plaintiff’s lawyers spent a significant portion of their time questioning Zuckerberg about Instagram’s efforts to remove users under the age of 13. 

Zuckerberg said that some users lie about their age when signing up for Instagram. He added that the company includes age limits in its terms during the sign-up process and removes all identified underage users. He also repeatedly said that he believes that companies like Apple and Google, which maintain operating systems and app stores are better suited to handle age verification. 

“You expect a 9-year-old to read all of the fine print,” a lawyer for the plaintiff asked Zuckerberg, according to CNBC. “That’s your basis for swearing under oath that children under 13 are not allowed?”

A Meta spokesperson told the Associated Press the company strongly disagrees with the allegations in the lawsuit and said they are “confident the evidence will show our long-standing commitment to supporting young people.”

Meta faces another consumer protection trial in New Mexico brought by the state’s attorney general, who alleges that the company failed to prevent child sexual exploitation on its platforms. 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com