Re: Mr. Meseeks
"That google statement seems to be irrelevant and more of a smoke bomb to confuse the issue."
The main issue is the automated opt-in of the device owner/photo owner IMO because thats where the crime/felony/rulebreaking/whateveritis starts. The secondary issue of unconsented use of "collateral biometrics" seems to collide with even more regulations/laws/whateverrules (Quite frankly i never understood the US judiciary system and i believe the lack of precision in the english language adds a good dose of WTF to it anyway.). If the base issue did not exist (provided google etc. play by the rules which i highly doubt.) then maybe the secondary issue you pointed out much better than i can word it would be greatly reduced. After all, if the photos may not be processed/stolen at all, collateral biometrics cannot happen.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
