I am not using them, just enhancing them for the person, sending them back to them and not using them at all. Not sure how anyone or the government can say that making a sky bluer in a picture for someone is commercializing. What they do with it, I could not care less since it is their photo to begin with, and incumbent on them to be culpable for their actions. It is their photo and they have the final say-so, not me.
If that is the case as you say, many cities have photos of people arrested on their website. If what you are saying is true, they are in violation for using photos. And if that is the case, why could the person with the mugshot not sue the jail? Makes no sense if someone takes a photo, and posts it. And if this is the case, wouldn't everyone putting a photo on this site be in violation? I am trying to learn. I am not using the photos, only sending it back, but have not enhanced a picture from anyone.
But if someone on here asks, "What is the best case to buy? What is the best filter to buy? And if someone posts a photo of an item, with a link, aren't they in essence no longer a novice, and violating what you are saying? Taking a picture, and recommending something and doing anything as you say, would make them a professional photographer. As you described, "used for any commercial, scientific, or support of a non-profit," you are no longer a hobbyist.