Responding:
Paragraph 8: "Although the evidence suggests the filamentary structures are protofeathers, he notes, the lack of any other remains in the ambera distinctive bit of bone, say, or a shred of skinleaves open the possibility that the structures aren't associated with dinosaurs at all."
So, the article does not say it the way you reported.
In a few years, somebody will do DNA analysis on those structures, someone else will find related material in other pieces of amber and a better picture will emerge.
That's how science works.
In the meantime, in scientific-ese: the hypothesis that those are "dino-fuzz" remains unconfirmed.
Allowing for just a little journalistic hype, the story is pretty straight-forward.
Thanks BroJoeK.