It's only amusing if you don't really believe in the rule of law. If the allegations from the article are true, there was probably tortuous interference, bribery, criminal threats, as well as a whole slew of broken consumer protection laws at the very least.
What you say is akin to saying it's amusing to see a chess player beaten in a game because the opponent just took all of his pieces and put them in his pocket, and bribed the judge to look the other way. What exactly is amusing about that? I really don't understand what kind of world people who make statements like this want to live in.