I was reviewing some past topics of discussion today, and I happened to spend some time reviewing what happened with a libel lawsuit a scientist (Mark Jacobson) published after he claimed criticis intentionally published false claims about his work. The case itself doesn't matter for today's purposes. What matters is he sued both an author of a paper which made the claims and the journal the paper was published in. That journal is named the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). It made a hilarious argument in response to the lawsuit:
I get PNAS meant this in the sense one cannot prove it intended to be legally bound by its editorial guidelines in the form of a contract. Still, it's probably not wise to file a legal document saying it's impossible to prove you intended to be required to follow your own guidelines.