I do not believe that current experiments are parlor tricks for a couple reasons:
1) Although information cannot be transferred distances of meters in the electrical signal FTL experiment, perhaps shorter distances are possible. From the article, the pulse peak travels FTL, but not the total energy, conserving relativity. This necessarily means that the pulse becomes drawn out and distorted. But we don't know the rate at which it is distorted. It may be possible to transmit information over mm or cm. A limited amount of distortion might be overcome through mathematical procedures, allowing very short distances to be covered. And in any case, the rate of decay may be neglible over microcircuit distances. Yes I'm talking out my butt because I'm not a physicist/mathematician, but then again, you never know. I'm just throwing ideas out.
If I'm reading this correctly, this experiment is not simply a personal/outside reference frame problem as boomerlu alluded to. In the reference frame problem, the person feels like they are to the destination instantly because time slows down at high % of c. They do not actually move faster than c. The observer sees them go at c, and time moves more quickly for them. At no point do either of the observers actually percieve themselves or the other to travel FTL. It's a time thing. The pulse peak IS in fact travelling FTL.
2) Absolutely every technological breakthrough that started with theoretical manipulations has gone throuigh the "parlor trick" stage before becoming useful. Quantum physics? Planck's blackbody radiation solution (which gave birth to quantum) was considered by many, for years, to be just a trick of the mathematics to work the problem out. Not until later did they actually "figure out" quantum (Not today either).
3) The distance covered is a very real breathrough. Up to this, all pulses were very, very limited in distance. 120 meters is huge, as is the fact that they did this without huge expense.
4) Just because relativity may turn out to be violated, it does not necessarily mean that it is useless. Newtonian physics anyone? Not that I'm implying it will be...but it does breakdown near black holes, as far as I'm aware. Maybe there are other instances where relativity is "broken". Maybe not.
Yes, I realize the causation problem is big (well, huge). That's why I'm going to be very interested to hear/read/see more.