B'ham - when I read (for example) this:-
That doesn't sound very "legally constrained" and to not give further rational for the comment just seems very odd, especially since it isn't helpful to the aviation industry because at the very least it seems to have a major manufacturer concluding at this stage something very different to the regulator of two countries. It also suggests that they are able to conclude something that the accident investigators are not, which again seems odd.
Further (whilst not important in the context of the accident) given Airbus and Bristow are all tradable entities and this information is very much "market sensitive" one now wonders how they plan to manage the release to the market.