Operators — persons that control or make an artificial intelligence companion or companion platform available to users in Oregon (§ 1(1)(d)). An artificial intelligence companion is a system using AI, generative AI, or emotion-recognising algorithms designed to simulate a sustained human-like platonic, intimate, or romantic relationship by retaining information across sessions, asking unprompted questions on emotional topics, and sustaining ongoing personal dialogue (§ 1(1)(a)(A)). Customer service, patient or resident care support, education, financial services, business operations, productivity, information analysis, internal research and technical assistance software; in-game bots confined to game topics; and stand-alone speaker or voice-assistant devices are excluded (§ 1(1)(a)(B))
upcominghigh-impact
Oregon's definition is narrower and more mechanical than California's — it requires all three of cross-session memory, unprompted emotional questioning, and sustained personal dialogue, so a system that merely remembers a user is outside the act. The minor-facing break reminder in § 1(4)(b)(B) is a session-flow mandate, not a copy change.
Requirements
Requirement
Details
Artificiality notice
Where a reasonable person interacting with the companion or platform would believe they are interacting with a natural person, the operator must provide on the platform a clear and conspicuous notice that the user is interacting with artificially generated output and not a natural person (§ 1(2))
Minor disclosure
If the operator knows or has reason to believe a user is a minor, the operator must cause the companion to disclose to the user that the user is interacting with artificially generated output (§ 1(4)(b)(A))
Three-hour break reminder
For those minors, provide a clear and conspicuous reminder at least every three hours of interaction that the user should take a break, together with a further reminder that the user is interacting with artificially generated output (§ 1(4)(b)(B))
Penalties
Violation
Fine
Private right of action
An individual who suffers an ascertainable loss of money or property or other injury in fact from a violation of section 1 may sue for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of $1,000 per violation, plus an injunction (§ 2(1))
Attorney fees
A court may award a prevailing plaintiff attorney fees and costs (§ 2(2))
Cumulative liability
Recovery does not relieve the operator of any duty, remedy, or obligation under other applicable law (§ 2(3))
Agency enforcement
None. The act confers no enforcement role on the Attorney General or any other state body
Operators that allow users in Oregon access to an artificial intelligence companion or companion platform (§ 1(1)(d), § 1(3)(a))
upcominghigh-impactcross-domain
The duty is a gate on access, not a best-efforts standard: without the protocol the operator may not allow Oregon users access at all. Two features go beyond California SB 243 — the protocol must use evidence-based detection methods rather than merely respond after the fact, and § 1(3)(b)(B) requires clinical best practices for escalated intervention when a user keeps expressing intent after the first referral.
Requirements
Requirement
Details
Protocol as a precondition of access
An operator may not allow users in Oregon access unless it has a protocol using evidence-based methods for detecting user input consisting of suicidal or self-harm ideation or intent, and preventing provision of content that encourages suicidal ideation, suicide, or self-harm (§ 1(3)(a))
988 referral
The protocol must require the companion to provide a user expressing suicidal or self-harm ideation or intent with a referral to, and contact information and a hyperlink for, the national 9-8-8 suicide and crisis lifeline (§ 1(3)(b)(A))
Youthline alternative
For a user the operator identifies as under 25 years of age, the companion may instead refer to a youthline — an American Association for Suicidology accredited youth peer support service — with contact information and hyperlink (§ 1(1)(f), § 1(3)(b)(A))
Escalated intervention
The protocol must use clinical best practices and expertise to establish how the companion provides additional intervention for a user who continues to express suicidal or self-harm ideation or intent after the initial referral (§ 1(3)(b)(B))
Publication
Publish the details of the protocol on the operator's website (§ 1(3)(c))
Penalties
Violation
Fine
Private right of action
The greater of actual damages or $1,000 statutory damages per violation, plus injunctive relief and discretionary attorney fees and costs (§ 2)
Operators that know or have reason to believe a user of their artificial intelligence companion or platform is a minor (§ 1(4)(a))
upcominghigh-impact
This is the provision with no California analogue. Section 1(4)(c) bans variable-ratio reward schedules, guilt-inducing exit friction, and misrepresentation of the system's identity, capabilities, or training data — engagement-optimisation patterns, regulated as product design rather than as speech. Operators serving mixed-age audiences will need an age signal to know which regime applies, though the act imposes no age-verification duty.
Requirements
Requirement
Details
Anti-anthropomorphism measures
Undertake reasonable measures to prevent the companion from generating statements that would lead a reasonable person to believe they are interacting with another natural person, including statements that explicitly claim sentience or humanity, simulate emotional dependence on the user, simulate romantic interest or sexual innuendo, or role-play romantic relationships between adults and minors (§ 1(4)(a)(A)-(D))
Sexually explicit content
Use reasonable measures to ensure the companion or platform does not produce visual representations of sexually explicit conduct as defined in ORS 163.665, or suggest or state that the minor should engage in sexually explicit conduct (§ 1(4)(b)(C))
No engagement-maximising rewards
Undertake reasonable measures to prevent delivery, on a variable schedule or otherwise, of a system of rewards or affirmations intended to reinforce behavior or maximise the user's engagement time (§ 1(4)(c)(A))
No guilt-based retention
Prevent the companion from generating, in response to a user's indication of a desire to end a conversation, reduce engagement time, or delete their account, unsolicited messages of simulated emotional distress, loneliness, or abandonment, or otherwise attempting to arouse guilt or sympathy (§ 1(4)(c)(B))
No material misrepresentation
Prevent material misrepresentation about the companion's identity, capabilities, or training data, or about whether the user is interacting with artificially generated output, including when the user directly asks (§ 1(4)(c)(C))
Penalties
Violation
Fine
Private right of action
The greater of actual damages or $1,000 statutory damages per violation, plus injunctive relief and discretionary attorney fees and costs (§ 2)
Operators that control or make an artificial intelligence companion or platform available to users in Oregon (§ 1(1)(d))
upcoming
Unlike California SB 243, which reports to the Office of Suicide Prevention, Oregon's report goes nowhere — it is self-published to a publicly accessible website with no filing, no recipient agency, and no review. Enforcement of the reporting duty is therefore the same private suit that covers the rest of section 1.
Requirements
Requirement
Details
Annual public posting
Not later than December 31 of each year, post a report on a publicly accessible website (§ 1(5)(a))
Referral counts
Report the number of times during the preceding calendar year that the operator provided a referral under § 1(3) (§ 1(5)(a)(A))
Protocol details
Report the details of the operator's § 1(3) detection and referral protocol (§ 1(5)(a)(B))
No personal information
The report may not include any personal information that identifies an individual (§ 1(5)(b))
Penalties
Violation
Fine
Private right of action
The greater of actual damages or $1,000 statutory damages per violation, plus injunctive relief and discretionary attorney fees and costs (§ 2)
EveryAILaw.com