To call it lying is just arguing about the meanings of words. This is literally what lawyers are paid to do. The data payload can be called end to end encrypted. You can easily say to the user that "your emails are encrypted from end to end, they are encrypted before it leaves your computer and decrypted on the receivers computer" without talking about how your key server works.
Systems that incorporate a method to allow unlocking using multiple keys don't usually advertise the fact that this is happening. People may even be legally obligated to not tell you.
“End-to-end encryption (E2EE) is a method of implementing a secure communication system where only communicating users can participate. No one else, including the system provider, telecom providers, Internet providers or malicious actors, can access the cryptographic keys needed to read or send messages.”
So if you send another set of keys to someone else, it’s obviously not E2E.
I agree completely that it is wrong in spirit. But wikipedia's text is a definition, not the only existing one. And for practical use even the most obvious definitions have legal caveats.
For example, asking for 10 gallons of soda at a restaurant advertising unlimited refills will not fly, even though virtually everyone will agree on the definition of the term "unlimited". My 2c.
