Oregon

Oregon

Date: 
August 1, 2012

Summary of statute(s): An individual who is a party to an electronic communication, or who has the consent of one of the parties to the communication, can lawfully record it or disclose its contents. But a lawful recording of an in-person conversation requires that all parties be informed, except under certain circumstances. A person also can lawfully record electronic communications that are readily accessible to the general public. Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 165.540 (West 2012).

Oregon Supreme Court recognizes public right to view trial exhibits, but leaves to courts' discretion

Raymond Baldino | Secret Courts | News | June 15, 2012
News
June 15, 2012

The Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts of America cannot prevent the release of court documents introduced in a child sexual abuse jury trial that resulted in a $19.4 million verdict against the organization.

Judge denies blogger retrial in Oregon defamation case

Rachel Bunn | Libel | News | April 3, 2012
News
April 3, 2012

A federal judge denied a motion for retrial in the case of a self-described investigative blogger, ruling that private figure plaintiffs do not have to establish “negligence” or “actual malice” to hold a non-media defendant liable in a defamation suit arising out of speech not on a matter of public concern.

Mont. blogger ordered to pay $2.5 million for defamation

J.C. Derrick | Libel | Feature | December 8, 2011
Feature
December 8, 2011

A Montana blogger has been ordered to pay $2.5 million in defamation damages after a federal judge said she would have to be working for a mainstream media organization in order to qualify for protections afforded journalists.

The judgment against Crystal Cox, a self-proclaimed investigative blogger, arose from an allegedly defamatory statement about Obsidian Finance Group, LLC, and its senior principal, Kevin D. Padrick. The statement was posted on Cox's website bankruptcycorruption.com.

Blog's context suggests that posts are protected opinion

Kristen Rasmussen | Libel | Feature | August 24, 2011
Feature
August 24, 2011

An Oregon blogger’s disparaging “almost stream of consciousness-like” statements about the trustee in a bankruptcy case are protected opinion under the First Amendment, a federal judge in Portland recently ruled.

The opinion in Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox highlights the importance of courts’ consideration of the “looser, more relaxed communication style” of the Internet in their evaluations of allegedly defamatory online communications.

Court strikes down explicit-materials laws

Rosemary Lane | Newsgathering | Feature | September 23, 2010
Feature
September 23, 2010

The U.S. Court of Appeals sitting in Portland, Oregon, (9th Cir.) struck down two laws Monday that would have prohibited making sexually explicit material accessible to minors, ruling they were overbroad and infringed on First Amendment rights.

Sheriff wages battle over concealed weapon permits

Kathleen Cullinan | Freedom of Information | Quicklink | November 12, 2008
Quicklink
November 12, 2008

An Oregon sheriff is pushing concealed handgun license holders by the thousands to fight what he suspects could be an appellate decision saying their names and other information are public.

Bloggers threaten cozy access arrangement in Oregon

Hannah Bergman | Newsgathering | Analysis | October 7, 2008
Analysis
October 7, 2008

In 1973, Oregon’s open meeting law codified what may be a unique arrangement between reporters and government bodies -- news media representatives were allowed into executive sessions so long as they didn’t report on what happened there.

In most states, executive sessions of any governing body are closed to everyone. Boards and councils use the meetings to discuss real estate transactions, employee discipline, ongoing litigation and a variety of similar things allowed under state open meetings laws.

Oregon blogger can remain anonymous, judge holds

Samantha Fredrickson | Reporter's Privilege | Quicklink | October 3, 2008
Quicklink
October 3, 2008

An Oregon newspaper does not have to give up the identity of someone who commented anonymously on its website, a judge held this week, because the state shield law protects anonymous bloggers just as it does confidential sources.