@Jonathan Bailey

In these instances the photos were all "modeling" shots either taken by the avatar in question of themselves or with permission of the subject. Even from the photos themselves you can tell they were taken with cooperation of the subject. So that end isn't at play here.

Anshe Chung tried to have several news outfits remove photos of her at a virtual press conference that was "attacked" by griefers. The nature of the attack was embarrassing as were the photos and she tried to strong-arm people into not posting photos of it by frivolous DMCA notices. She gave this up when it became pretty apparent that these claims wouldn't stand up whatsoever. While the LL ToS grants content creators IP over what they make (be it in-world items or photography) it also grants LL and other residents a limited derivative license that inadvertently made any photos taken of Anshe Chung in a "public" virtual place fair use whether or not her avatar itself was potentially something that could be copywritten. LL's legal team likened it to taking a photo of a street and catching someone in the frame.

I don't think there's much substance here for a test case. The framework is already pretty established and the rights to the artwork belongs to those who created the photos, not this loser and his frivolous ebay listings.