He is two miles outside the surveillance zone, for one thing.
The camera placed on his land without his approval should revert to his ownership.
I find nothing in the matter that disfavors this guy except for his being a lawyer, who typically have an eye for litigating money into their pockets.
“He is two miles outside the surveillance zone, for one thing.”
According to you. Please give us the lat and long of the camera and his fenceline. Bet this is some legal sophistry. His entry gate is likely 2 miles out of the zone, but not the entire property.
And that far in, there are likely good reasons to watch his place.