Not so much what an individual judge might think, but what the law of the particular jurisdiction is. (As a practical matter, though, an individual judge -- and god forbid, a jury -- can wreak havoc with reason.)
I think the parade scene is tricky . Who would argue that such a deliberate public spectacle wasn't newsworthy?
Yet the trouble seems to come when you, as a private individual (that is, for example, not as a journalist, and not with consent or other privilege) use an image of another private individual for commercial or other "profit" purpose, or if your methodology in either acquiring the image or using it is particularly offensive.
I guess my personal "test" would be to put myself on the other side of the lens or the publicity and consider whether I would regard similar unconsented use of my own image unpleasant or unacceptable. If I wound up on the "Froot Loops" box instead of "Wheaties," I might feel the whiplash of umbrage and have to visit my legal adviser.
"Street photography" generates a huge amount of discussion on these issues. One does need to be very careful when reading Internet pronouncements from the uninformed ("I believe that if you're out in public, you're fair game!!" and "Photographers have legal rights, too!!" Well, duh.)
Here are a couple of URLs for further consideration:
http://www.publaw.com/photo.html
http://www.baja.com/sensuousline/sli...releases.shtml