Clever, but the constraints of the existing contract may not allow any form of their family, products, ideas, o,ages to be broadcast, or marketed because of copyright infringement, much less the fact that the network may call foul (pardon the pun) on any similarity issues to the families notoriety if they somehow try to branch off and do something on another network, or show similar to the one they are doing now...
Happens all the time...
Admittedly, I do not watch this program...But I do know these folks, this family makes a bundle off their images, the show, the products sold at retail outlets, etc etc etc...
All that would cease to be profittable to the family, much less the network and any blowback from any boycott of the same program and products, and the shows advertisers...
Boycotts used to be effective...Nowadays, it has very little impact ebcause of the structuring of contracts these days with on air talent, or their businesses...
What would be the ultimate “screw you” would be the network takes control of the family business that originally got them noticed in the first place...the networkk would just shut them down and let the business fail, and that would be the end of that...
And the devil can rant and rave... God always wins. It is a battle between the spiritual titans. And God if obeyed always succeeds, always always always.
Contractually, A+E is probably doing this under a ‘moral clause’ (Yes, ironic)- that his statements brought disrepute upon the show.
However that may very well not hold up in a court of law considering the nature of the show.
So a+E may have lost their contractual rights by breaking the contract.
all depends on the specifics of course.