Sorry it's you who missed the point. You're again expounding on the technicalities of what was done and it's all irrelevant. Put your calculations of "who's paying who how much for what" aside because that won't get anyone anywhere. Here's what is relevant:
Churning on a large scale is not good for AS (and/or BofA) business.
Period. That's all that matters. You're bad for their bottom line, they're legally allowed to shut you down, so they did just that (by you I mean whoever). Case closed.
You say technicality, I say meaningful distinction.
Setting aside the fact that these T&C are contracts of adhesion, I for one would find it disturbing that AS is, with one hand, collecting money from BoA for purchased miles, while, with the other hand, confiscating those purchased miles once earned because of a vague and alleged breach of the terms. (Which terms? Well, even their own don't seem to include provisions for this, and it's even much more preposterous if they're confiscating them based on the BoA terms.)
And, further, if in fact BoA pays AS for the miles earned from the AS card, then I fail to see why there would be any material loss on the part of BA that would make it bad for business. FTR, only some very,
very small fraction of awards are even booked on partners, let alone booked in a premium cabin on EK.