Firstly the courts won't prosecute something like this in absence of criminal intent (it would make a precedent against police, FBI, ATF, etc. that spying is guilty-until-proven-innocent/just).
Secondly, civil suits are completely unrelated to criminal suits, in most districts these are completely different court buildings and judges.
Thirdly, criminal suits can still be filed by anyone who was inappropriately photographed (IE compromising photographs), also the parents (or anyone except the children) can file their own criminal suit for any photographs taken of themselves (not their children). The Attorney said criminal charges won't be laid against the school for the systems use against the child, not that no criminal act was committed.
Finally, the Inquirer's writing ability is utter shit... just thought I'd add it to the list because frankly this article was appallingly written.
Secondly, civil suits are completely unrelated to criminal suits, in most districts these are completely different court buildings and judges.
Thirdly, criminal suits can still be filed by anyone who was inappropriately photographed (IE compromising photographs), also the parents (or anyone except the children) can file their own criminal suit for any photographs taken of themselves (not their children). The Attorney said criminal charges won't be laid against the school for the systems use against the child, not that no criminal act was committed.
Finally, the Inquirer's writing ability is utter shit... just thought I'd add it to the list because frankly this article was appallingly written.