OK. So. It was ruled that the victims were the children who's stock photos this man had purchased. Extant reporting suggests they are too young to understand the significance of this whole affair. But the judge ruled that the victims, while potentially never knowing these events took place, have suffered an injury that WILL (not might) negatively impact their whole futures.

OK. Is that jurisprudence or does the judge have a crystal ball? If this case is sealed, how is anyone in the future to determine that these (now grown) individuals had their infant photos incorporated into expert witness testimony? How will the children in question know until somebody tells them?

This whole issue of paying a fine instead of jail time is a rank admission that there is no victim of a crime at hand.