Local networks replace national ads with their own all the time. I don't know what the contracts between networks say on that, but it's a common practice. But if what you're suggesting turns out to be true, it's a killer for their business model. My guess is that they contracted with the plaintiff to sell ads for them and then stiffed them.
In any event, it doesn't change the fact that they are not disclosing the details of the suit or why they suddenly spent millions on consultants out of the blue. If someone lives in Oregon where the trial was held, maybe they could visit the courthouse and pull the case records to find out.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
