According to the article, this is the second time this has happened:
In the Gasperini case, however, the second circuit noted that the prosecution had included testimony from the Internet Archive’s office manager, “who explained how the Archive captures and preserves evidence of the contents of the internet at a given time.”
The article goes on to discuss whether it will continue to be necessary to have an Internet Archive employee testify, or if it will just be accepted eventually. I think it will happen. Once we get enough consensus that the Wayback Machine is simply doing what it claims to do, there’s no reason it should be used as evidence.
So if you want to claim your website never had “x” on it, you better not leave it up there long enough to be in the archive, and lawyers, you may want to add it to your list of potential sources of evidence.