If it’s being operated over a home then it will almost certainly have to follow the rules on Operation Over People and those can be quite restrictive, especially for drones that weigh more than .55lbs.

That is incorrect… If you actually read the law you are trying to reference you will learn it’s a prohibition on flying over “open-air assemblies of people” and if you read the final rule report (found on the very bottom of the page you linked under resources) on page 128 & 129 you will see how the FAA classifies “open-air assemblies of people”.

The FAA received a few comments addressing the proposal to prohibit Category 3 operations over open-air assemblies of people. One commenter recommended the FAA clarify what it means by an “assembly of people” and provide a quantity or density of people that constitute a significant risk. The FAA has declined to define this term by regulation; rather, the FAA employs a case-by-case approach in determining how to apply the term “open-air assembly.”58 Whether an operational area is an open-air assembly is evaluated by considering the density of people who are not directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft and the size of the operational area. Such assemblies are usually associated with public spaces. The FAA considers some potential examples of open-air assemblies may include sporting events, concerts, parades, protests, political rallies, community festivals, or parks and beaches during certain events. Some potential examples that are less likely to be considered open-air assemblies include individual persons or families exiting a shopping center, athletes participating in friendly sports in an open area without spectators, individuals or small groups taking leisure in a park or on a beach, or individuals walking or riding a bike along a bike path, but whether an open-air assembly exists depends on a case-by-case determination based on the facts and circumstances of each case.

While the FAA refused to strictly give a definition, what was provided is enough to construed that private property does not constitute an “open-air assemblies of people”.

That is incorrect on a federal level, your milage may vary with city/country/state laws. Federally in the United States the right to reasonable expectation of privacy does not extend to outside of your house per Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 (1924). The government is allowed to surveil you from public airspace without a warrant per Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989).

There’s only a reasonable expectation of privacy in private. As the courts have ruled many times, it’s something is visible from the street or from the air, it’s probably not private.

Actual airplanes must have a hell of a time abiding by that rule then.

If I remember the rules correctly you are allowed to fly over private property as long as it isn’t fenced off. You cannot overfly buildings without permission. You can take pictures of private property without permission as long as they don’t contain anything personally identifiable (ie. don’t take pictures of people, but no people is fine).

That site is full of false claims with zero sources to back up those claims which is pretty funny seeing as that article is claiming to be written by a retired corporate attorney. The site is also chocked full of SEO tricks which is possible why it was the first result that came up for you. For example on 5. the word drone is stealthily a link to another irrelevant article about drone deliveries on a different as sketchy site. Link hiding is a well known trick to gain the system and bump up your page.