Oregon

Oregon recognizes intrusion, false light, and misappropriation but has rejected the private facts tort. Anderson v. Fisher Broadcasting Co., 712 P.2d 803 (Or. 1986).

Intrusion: The alleged trespass of a news crew during a police search of a home was not sufficient to mandate a finding of invasion of privacy; the jury properly considered other factors in determining that the crews conduct was not highly offensive. Magenis v. Fisher Broadcasting Inc., 798 P.2d 1106 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

No intrusion occurred when the picture of a woman taken for a newspaper later appeared in a Hustler magazine article, which allegedly aimed to make readers look at the woman like they looked at nude models. Ault v. Hustler Magazine Inc., 860 F.2d 877 (9th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1080 (1989).

The publication of a photograph of a prisoner being booked at a jail is protected because law enforcement is a matter of public interest. Huskey v. Dallas Chronicle, 13 Med. L. Rptr. 1057 (D. Or. 1986).

Private facts: The television broadcast of film footage of an automobile accident victim in a spot advertisement for a special news report on emergency medical services was protected as newsworthy. Anderson v. Fisher Broadcasting Co., 712 P.2d 803 (Or. 1986).

False light: The Oregon Supreme Court noted in a 1998 opinion that it had not previously recognized the false light invasion of privacy tort, but then refrained from deciding whether to do so because the statements before it, regarding a campaign against expansion of an airport, did not place a local stunt pilot in a false light. The state Supreme Court did note, however, that the Oregon Court of Appeals, an intermediate appellate court, has recognized false light claims for more than a decade. Reesman v. Highfill, 965 P.2d 1030 (Or. 1998).

The publication of a photograph of a visitor at an alcohol treatment centers open house to illustrate anarticle about the center may have implied that the visitor was a patient at the center. Therefore, the visitor had sufficient grounds for a false light claim. Dean v. Guard Publishing Co., 744 P.2d 1296 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).

Where a photograph of a student accompanied an article that described the student as engaged in an "apparent drug transaction," the student could not have evidence of her drug use excluded from a trial on her false light claim. Martinez v. Democrat-Herald, 669 P.2d 818 (Or. Ct. App.), petition denied, 672 P.2d 1193 (Or. 1983).

Misappropriation: The use of videotape of an accident victim to promote a special news report was not misappropriation. Anderson v. Fisher Broadcasting Co., 712 P.2d 803 (Or. 1986).

A picture of a student apparently engaged in a drug transaction that was included in a feature article did not give rise to a misappropriation claim. Martinez v. Democrat-Herald, 669 P.2d 818 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).

A man who challenged his consent to the use of his picture on a poster because he did not receive the promised compensation had no misappropriation claim, but he may have been entitled to modeling fee. Castagna v. Western Graphics Corp., 590 P.2d 291 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).

No misappropriation occurred when Hustler magazine used a womans picture, not for commercial gain, but to accompany a newsworthy article about her anti-pornography efforts. Ault v. Hustler Magazine Inc., 860 F.2d 877 (9th Cir. 1988).