HBO says it's ridiculous that they would give up their right to say anything negative about MJ

But that's exactly what they did when they signed this:

"HBO shall not do ANY act that may disparage" MJ

how does HBO define ANY?

They cannot reasonably argue that this clause limited non-disparagement to things related to the concert. There is no way MJ would have given this exclusive right to them if they had told him, we reserve the right to call you a monster

so their only argument can be, the clause does not cover LN because we aired it in 2019 not in 1992. But then since there is no expiration date in the clause, who decides when in between those two years did HBO earn back their right to disparage MJ in any manner?

HBO could not cite a single case where the dispute was over expiration and the court not an arbitrator decided when that happened.

Instead they cited Litton v. NLRB where the expiration date was in the contract itself.

How does that make sense? https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/501/190/

Another part of the contract states that HBO shall not air any program concerning MJ without Licensor's (Optimum's) written approval.

This is why HBO tried to distance themselves from LN, that they are not the producers. But they are executive producers

And they didn't ask for written consent for sure.

HBO has tried every trick under the Sun to excuse their undeniable breach of this contract.

They argue that LN does not include confidential information despite the contract defining it as ANY info related to MJ from ANY source

In 1992 HBO was willing to give up their right to say anything negative about MJ , without limitation, because at that time their interest was to use MJ for a rating bonanza (i.e. profit)

In 2019 they pretend that it's crazy to assume they would give up that right because they want to profit from Leaving Neverland.

In other words they want their cake and eat it too.