Offenses Against General Welfare and Animals

ORS 167.095
Defenses in prosecutions under ORS 167.090


In any prosecution for violation of ORS 167.090 (Publicly displaying nudity or sex for advertising purposes), it shall be an affirmative defense for the defendant to prove:

(1)

That the public display, even though in connection with a commercial venture, was primarily for artistic purposes or as a public service; or

(2)

That the public display was of nudity, exhibited by a bona fide art, antique or similar gallery or exhibition, and visible in a normal display setting. [1971 c.743 §262]
§§ 167.060 to 167.100

Notes of Decisions

Prohibitions against obscene live performance or distribution of obscene material do not violate federal or state constitutional right of free speech. Film Follies v. Haas, 22 Or App 365, 539 P2d 669 (1975)

In a federal obscenity prosecution, it was a question for the trial court whether the people of Oregon approved of conduct then permitted by these sections, or whether community standards were at variance with these sections. U.S. v. Danley, 523 F2d 369 (1975)

Law Review Citations

51 OLR 428, 429, 523, 537-552, 556 (1972)

Chapter 167

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Exemption of nuisance laws from constitutional requirement for payments based on government regulations restricting use of property, (2001) Vol 49, p 284

Law Review Citations

51 OLR 427-637 (1972)


Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021