No person by engaging in a pattern of conduct shall knowingly cause another person to believe that the offender will cause physical harm to the other person or cause mental distress to the other person.
If you read carefully you will see that the person must knowingly cause mental distress which is defined here.
"Mental distress" means any of the following:
(a) Any mental illness or condition that involves some temporary substantial incapacity;
(b) Any mental illness or condition that would normally require psychiatric treatment, psychological treatment, or other mental health services, whether or not any person requested or received psychiatric treatment, psychological treatment, or other mental health services.
That means the prosecutor must prove that you were following a person with the intent to intimidate or cause mental harm. I am intimately familiar with this law as I live in Ohio and have a crazy neighbor (back yard) that would drive by my house and dump trash in my yard, walk by my house dump trash and put tree branches behind my car, dump soda on my car, which I caught on camera. The prosecutor said that they could only get him for littering because he didn't cause mental distress or threaten me.
Sure, legally. At some point such behavior by an actual human being would creep the shit out of you and fulfill the definition of stalking, which is definitely illegal in the US (specifics vary by state). If only such laws could be applied to automated cameras and databases...
If all you do if follow someone on public property you are not stalking them in a legal sense. Trespassing, vandalism, threats,
Well, in this case it's some capitalists taking advantage of a business opportunity to spy on you. What bothers me is I don't recall signing any sort of release on this, when someone wants to look where I've been driving my car.
You don't have to sign a release to be recorded in public as you have no expectation of privacy. Unless a law is passed making it illegal use public images to track an individual or vehicle there is nothing to stop this sort of thing.
A tamper coating like that will get gradually damaged just through normal wear and tear...
Requiring the owner to buy a new $10,000 phone every year, it's brilliant.
You are making the assumption that ignorance was the culprit is very naive. The delaying by the DOJ to release documents subpenaed by congress, then the issuing of executive privilege to stop those documents from being released even though Eric Holder claimed under oath that he nor the white house was aware of the operation, indicates otherwise. I would say giving guns to criminals certainly makes all parties involved in the operation accomplices to any crimes committed with those guns.