First of all, there's no infringement of <i>privacy</i> if someone takes a picture of you in a public place. If you didn't want anyone to know about it, you shouldn't have gone to a public fricken bar with your adulterous date. If you're that guy who gets caught, sucks to be you. Don't cheat on your wife next time - or if you do, do it in private. What if it was one of your wife's friends who spotted you? Would you sue her? Big fat chance.<p>Secondly, that's not a one in a million chance. Unless his wife is a god damn social media photo site addict, it's more like a zero chance. Why would she stumble on that picture, ever? Unless, perhaps, she goes to the same bar and looks through the hundreds of pictures taken there. But now you're not talking random chance, you're talking determined digging (or complete and utter stupidity on the part of the cheating husband).<p>Thirdly, I hardly know anyone who's been talking about color.com anyway. That's probably the biggest problem they have, rather than the rare occasion when someone may be caught out in the background of a photo.
Couldn't I could make the same argument about flickr.com? I take a picture. I call it "drinks after a bike ride." I tag it with "Pina Colada Bar." I make it public. How long before Mrs. James sees the picture? One in a million shot, right?<p>What privacy problem does color.com have that doesn't apply to flickr.com?
As a side note, this type of documentation of the physical world should get interesting when paired with projects like Microsoft Photosynth. (I'm sure there are other similar projects.)
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p16frKJLVi0" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p16frKJLVi0</a>
Something along these lines will make Google Streetview look quaint in a few years. (Although Google will probably be involved in mapping the world in 3D as well.)
Considering that I've never once seen something nice said about Color, overrated is hardly the word I'd use...unless we should all just start relentlessly hating on it.
If the risk hinges on millions of pictures flooding in, then James isn't really at any elevated risk since he's in a handful of said millions of pictures.<p>The only way Color makes things worse for James is if his wife knew he was at said bar on a <i>previous</i> night (i.e. she can't just show up in person) and sifts through those images. Or if Color employs amazing facial recognition and data aggregation to provide his wife a constant stream of James pictures.<p>I thought this was going to be about Hot Young Things inadvertently sharing nip slips with nearby Creepy Old Guys.