Introduction
In Oregon [5] [6], the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) is governed by several existing statutes, reflecting a broader national trend in addressing emerging technologies [6]. While there are no specific AI laws [6], the Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act (OUTPA) [1] [3] [4], the Oregon Consumer Privacy Act (OCPA) [1] [3] [4] [6], the Oregon Consumer Information Protection Act (OCIPA) [1] [3] [4], and the Oregon Equality Act (OEA) collectively provide a framework for overseeing the use of AI technologies.
Description
AI is regulated under several Oregon statutes [1] [3], including the Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act (OUTPA) [1] [3] [4], the Oregon Consumer Privacy Act (OCPA) [1] [3] [4] [6], the Oregon Consumer Information Protection Act (OCIPA) [1] [3] [4], and the Oregon Equality Act (OEA) [3]. While there are no specific AI laws in Oregon [6], these existing statutes govern the use of AI technologies, reflecting a broader national trend in regulating emerging technologies [6].
The OUTPA prohibits misrepresentations in consumer transactions [1] [3] [4], ensuring that AI systems [2], including consumer chatbots [4], deliver accurate and non-misleading information [2]. Businesses could face legal issues if they use AI-generated content [5], such as videos that falsely depict endorsements [5]. AI developers and deployers must ensure that their products provide truthful information, as misrepresentations can lead to liability for harms caused to downstream consumers [3], even if the misrepresentation is made indirectly or through AI [3]. Violations include false claims about AI product characteristics [3], unauthorized endorsements [3], deceptive robocalling practices [3], and misleading pricing claims, particularly during emergencies.
The OCPA grants consumers significant rights over their personal data, which is especially relevant for generative AI systems that often utilize personal data for training. Developers are required to disclose whether personal data was used in training AI models and must obtain express consent for the use of sensitive data [1] [3]. Importantly, retroactive changes to privacy notices to justify past data use are not permitted [4], and consumers must have the ability to withdraw consent [4] [6]. Entities acquiring third-party datasets may be classified as “controllers” under the OCPA [6], subjecting them to the same standards as original data collectors [6]. Additionally, consumers can opt out of their personal data being used for AI profiling in significant decision-making processes [4], such as those related to housing or lending [3], and can request deletion of their data [4]. Data Protection Assessments are mandated before processing personal data for profiling or high-risk activities [6], particularly concerning generative AI models [6], due to the heightened risks associated with using consumer data in AI models.
The OCIPA mandates that AI developers safeguard personal information with reasonable cybersecurity measures and comply with its provisions [1] [3], including notifying consumers and the Oregon Office of the Attorney General (OAG) in the event of a security breach. Violations of these regulations are enforceable under the OUTPA [4].
The OEA prohibits discrimination based on protected classes and addresses discrimination resulting from AI use [1] [3], particularly in housing and public accommodations [1] [2] [3] [4]. For example, an AI mortgage approval system that systematically denies loans to qualified applicants from certain demographics due to biased training data could violate this act [4]. Companies employing AI systems must ensure that these systems do not discriminate against qualified applicants based on biased data [2], as this could lead to legal violations [2]. Key principles for the ethical deployment of AI systems [4], such as explainability, privacy [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6], human accountability [1] [4] [6], transparency [4] [6], and fairness [4], are essential for organizations to consider in their AI use cases to mitigate legal and business risks.
On December 24, 2024 [1] [4], Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum issued guidance emphasizing the need for compliance with existing laws regarding AI technologies. This guidance [1] [2] [4] [5] [6], developed by the Oregon Department of Justice [5], highlights significant risks associated with AI [1], including unpredictability of outputs [1], fairness [1] [4] [6], accountability [1] [4] [6], and trustworthiness [1], particularly concerning privacy and the potential for bias stemming from biased data sets [1]. It underscores the importance of responsible and equitable AI implementation [6], given the opportunities and challenges it presents [6], and encourages businesses to understand the legal frameworks applicable to their AI use cases [6], ensure transparency and accuracy in their AI systems [6], implement robust data protection measures [6], prevent discriminatory outcomes [6], respect consumer rights [6], and conduct thorough risk assessments for high-risk applications [6]. Additionally, Senate Bill 1571 mandates that campaigns disclose the use of AI in manipulating media to influence voters [5], further emphasizing the evolving landscape of AI regulation in Oregon.
Conclusion
The regulatory framework in Oregon, while not specifically tailored to AI, effectively addresses the challenges posed by AI technologies through existing statutes. These laws ensure consumer protection, data privacy [4], and non-discrimination [1] [6], while also emphasizing the ethical deployment of AI systems. The guidance from the Oregon Attorney General and legislative measures like Senate Bill 1571 highlight the state’s proactive approach in adapting to the evolving landscape of AI, underscoring the importance of transparency, accountability [1] [4] [6], and fairness in AI applications.
References
[1] https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=185ca903-6b10-4b3a-8a30-4cb4a4468dd3
[2] https://www.corvallisadvocate.com/2025/oregon-attorney-generals-office-issues-guidance-for-businesses-using-artificial-intelligence/
[3] https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/oregon-issues-ai-guidance-for-businesses-1957884/
[4] https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/why-have-one-when-four-will-do-how-6123684/
[5] https://www.salemreporter.com/2025/01/02/oregon-attorney-general-issues-advice-to-businesses-on-use-of-ai/
[6] https://commlawgroup.com/2025/oregon-attorney-general-issues-guidance-on-artificial-intelligence/
