While the GDPR has extraterritoriality, you are over-reaching here.

Tea can collect and use photos of EU citizens, if it collected them in the USA, with (all other things being equal) no fear of GDPR violations.

So, yes Facebook can't collect photos of EU citizens, then process and do "stuff" with them in the USA, without violating GDPR, because that'd be the easiest out ever for multinational tech companies.

It is the location of the subject of the personal data collection that matters, not their citizenship.

Unrestricted by foreign law, yes. Would you be in favor of having US law enforced against you? It bewilders me why anyone would want more of this nonsense in the world instead of less.

The document you linked is interesting but I'm skeptical that you actually read it. It effectively says that in practice there's no hope of enforcing actions against entities that are purely in the US unless their behavior has run afoul of state or federal policy.

It does note that if concrete damages are recognized by the court that there is a decent chance US courts will cooperate to enforce the judgment. But the vast majority of GDPR enforcement is punitive as opposed to compensatory so it's not particularly relevant.

I'm also not clear why you think traveling would matter. DPA penalties are administrative in nature, not criminal. They are also likely to be levied against corporations as opposed to individuals. My guess is that the extremely unlikely worst case is your entry or visa application getting denied.

This is not true. Like, (almost) at all. (There are a few tiny exceptions, for instance, if an EU national commits child sexual abuse overseas, they can be prosecuted for it in the EU)

Two Germans shooting each other in Australia break Australian law, but not German law.

Ah yes, the notorious extraterritorial "right to be forgotten". Whereby the EU military dispatches its special forces to smash up computers in foreign data centers.

No, that isn't true. To the contrary actually, the GDPR applies to anyone on European soil, even US citizens. When you're on American soil, you fall under American legislation.

Are you saying the developers are European or what?

[dead]

please inform us before hitting post.

That's not really analogous to revenge porn laws (where the “revenege" part is both non-literal—the actual condition is lack of consent—and refers to a special circumstance that makes what is normally legal, illegal, not an enhanced penalty for existing offense.)

But if your proposed concept of “revenge libel” laws are just, as you say an added penalty for a subset of existing libel offenses, then while they might add more severe sanctions, they don't change the scope of what is prohibited, so they wouldn't change the calculus on whether anything is illegal.