I was asking the same thing. After thinking about it for a bit and reading more about the case, I think the short answer is no.

I think it could be argued that the nature of Ingress and the main purpose of it is NOT to exploit pictures to the public without paying the artist/sculptor in question. However this could obviously be up for debate, and I guess part of it depends on whether anyone sues Google over it.

Another important point to make is that the suing party in this case states in their press release, that Wikimedia could just have paid the organization a few 1000 SEK per year (~a few 100 USD) in a license fee and it would all be deemed legal.