ed, That's easy. PRs are NOT about the "spirit" in which they were crafted, nor the purpose for which they were crafted. They are either accurate or they are not. Period. "Desired effect", including inaccuracies, is not what they're supposed to be about.
PRs are supposed to be accurate and factual. That one WAS NOT, imo. First, they claimed SLJB was undertaking legal proceedings. "SLJB" was not, right? That's a falsehood, right? PV is not "SLJB". Yes or no? Now, if the PR had only been crafted as a warning, then you'd be able to argue "success" if it had deterred some folks who were doing unsavory things. However, that was not the claim of the PR. It was claiming legal success, of which there really wasn't any IMO. Prove me wrong. Validate your faith in the company by checking this out with the court system. I would like you to.
As backup for my stance (please dispute this!):
1) SLJB did not file a suit of any kind
2) PV did, and that suit is also moot until further action is taken by plaintiff
So, ed, you claim that I'm the one straying away from facts?? THE COMPANY itself is the one who's supposed to be held to that higher standard. Again, please please please prove me wrong. It's all a matter of record. Anyone can find out via the court system, no? Well?