Oregon Call Recording Laws: One-Party for Phone Calls

Oregon is a one-party consent state for phone calls: a participant may record a call, and a non-participant may record with at least one participant's consent. In-person conversations follow a stricter rule: everyone must be specifically informed before a conversation is recorded. Violations are Class A misdemeanors.

That split means an Oregon business can record its phone calls without notice under state law, but cannot quietly record an in-person meeting. Washington and California, Oregon's neighbors to the north and south, require all-party consent for phone calls too.

This is general information, not legal advice.

Oregon recording law at a glance

Question	Answer in Oregon
Phone calls (telecommunications)	One participant's consent (ORS 165.540(1)(a))
In-person conversations	All participants specifically informed (ORS 165.540(1)(c))
Criminal penalty	Class A misdemeanor (ORS 165.540(9))
Civil remedy	ORS 133.739 (scope tied to ORS 133.724, 133.737); privacy torts; federal § 2520
In-person rule upheld	Project Veritas v. Schmidt (9th Cir. en banc, 2025)

What the statute says

ORS 165.540(1) lists what a person may not do, except as otherwise provided. Three paragraphs matter most:

• (a) Obtain or attempt to obtain any part of a telecommunication or radio communication "to which the person is not a participant," by means of any device, "unless consent is given by at least one participant."
• (c) Obtain or attempt to obtain any part of a conversation by means of any device "if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained."
• (d) Obtain a conversation or telecommunication from someone while knowing or having good reason to believe it was initially obtained illegally.

Paragraph (a) is the phone rule, and it is one-party. Paragraph (c) is the in-person rule, and it requires that everyone be informed.

"Specifically informed"

The in-person rule is about notice, not formal consent. Everyone must be told the conversation is being recorded. Saying it at the start of a meeting, with a device in view, is the normal way to comply.

ORS 165.540(5) lists exceptions to the in-person rule, including recording during a felony that endangers human life and openly recording a law enforcement officer performing duties in public, when the recording is in plain view and the conversation is audible by normal unaided hearing.

The 2025 Ninth Circuit decision

Project Veritas challenged the in-person rule as a violation of the First Amendment. In January 2025, the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld ORS 165.540(1)(c), concluding the statute's notice requirement is a permissible protection of conversational privacy.

Phone calls versus meetings: a quick comparison

Situation	Oregon rule	What to do
Your employee records a customer phone call	One participant's consent (yours) is enough	Announce anyway if callers may be in WA, CA or NV
You record a video call with an Oregon client	The call itself is a telecommunication, but people in the room with you are in a conversation	Tell everyone at the start
You record an in-person sales meeting	All participants must be specifically informed	Say so and keep the device visible
A coworker hands you a recording of a meeting nobody was told about	Obtaining it knowing it was made illegally is prohibited (1)(d)	Do not keep or use it

Texts and electronic messages

According to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP), Oregon's definition of telecommunication covers transmission of "writing, signs, signals, pictures and sounds of all kinds" (ORS 165.535), so the one-party rule also applies to texts.

Penalties

Violation	Statute	Classification
Obtaining a phone call you are not part of without a participant's consent	165.540(1)(a)	Class A misdemeanor
Recording an in-person conversation without informing all participants	165.540(1)(c)	Class A misdemeanor
Obtaining a recording knowing it was made illegally	165.540(1)(d)	Class A misdemeanor

Civil liability

ORS 133.739 gives anyone whose wire, electronic or oral communication was intercepted, disclosed or used in violation of ORS 133.724 or 133.737 a civil claim against anyone who willfully did so, or procured someone else to. Damages are actual damages, but not less than $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is greater, plus punitive damages, and the court may award attorney fees.

Some summaries, including the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) guide, describe this as the remedy for violations of ORS 165.540. The text ties it to the interception-order and disclosure sections, so whether it reaches every private violation of 165.540 is less clear. Section 133.739(3) expressly preserves other civil remedies for invasion of privacy, and the federal Wiretap Act allows civil suits under 18 U.S.C. § 2520 for interceptions that violate federal law.

Calls between Oregon and neighboring states

Neighbor	Rule for phone calls
Washington	All-party; an announcement counts
California	All-party
Nevada	All-party for phone calls
Idaho	One-party

Oregon is surrounded by stricter phone rules. Portland businesses take calls from Vancouver, Washington all day, and southern Oregon businesses serve California. Washington's statute treats a recorded announcement as consent; California requires all-party consent for calls involving a cellphone and allows $5,000 per violation. Read interstate call recording consent and see the state-by-state table.

Three Oregon scenarios

A Portland software company records support calls with a notice. Oregon would allow recording without one, but customers in Washington and California hear the notice and are covered.

A Eugene consultant records an in-person client meeting on a phone in a pocket. The client was not specifically informed. That violates ORS 165.540(1)(c), even though a phone call with the same client could be recorded under the one-party rule.

A Medford contractor records a call with a customer in Redding, California, without saying so. Oregon allows it. California does not. Announce the recording.

What this means for Oregon businesses

Meetings and video calls

The in-person rule makes meeting recordings a separate issue from phone recordings. Announce recording at the start of meetings, and for video calls with people in all-party states, announce it too.

Customer calls

Even though Oregon is one-party for calls, most businesses near the Washington and California borders announce recordings. It is simpler than tracking where callers are.

Employees

A signed policy that business calls and meetings may be recorded documents consent and the notice required for in-person recordings.

Oregon recording checklist

• Recording notice at the start of recorded inbound calls
• Spoken notice on outbound recorded calls, especially to Washington and California
• Everyone specifically informed before recording an in-person meeting
• No hidden recorders in meetings
• Signed employee recording policy
• Callers who object are not recorded
• Access controls and retention schedule

Wording is in call recording disclosure scripts.

Recording calls in Oregon with Callata

With recording turned on, Callata plays "This call may be recorded." to both sides as the call connects, inbound and outbound, so Washington and California callers are informed. Recordings are transcribed and summarized with sentiment and action items on the contact's history. Callata's terms keep consent-law compliance with you. Pricing starts at $99 a month for five users, and each user after that adds $20 a month. Get started.