2017 ORS 646A.362¹
Exclusion of name from sweepstakes promotion mailing list
  • written request
  • rules

(1) As used in this section:

(a) “Exclusion request” means a written request to be excluded from a sweepstakes promotion mailing list or to be placed on a list of persons to whom sweepstakes promotions may not be mailed.

(b) “Sweepstakes promotion” has the meaning given that term in ORS 124.005 (Definitions for ORS 124.005 to 124.040).

(2) Any person who receives a sweepstakes promotion, or a combination of sweepstakes promotions from the same service, in the United States mail, regardless of the identities of the originators of the sweepstakes promotion, may send a written exclusion request to the originator of any sweepstakes promotion.

(3) The exclusion request shall be mailed to the address to which the recipient would have sent a payment for any goods or services promoted in the sweepstakes promotion had the recipient ordered the goods or services instead of mailing an exclusion request.

(4) An originator of a sweepstakes promotion who receives an exclusion request shall exclude the requestor’s name from the originator’s sweepstakes promotion mailing list or shall place the requestor’s name on a list of persons to whom sweepstakes promotions may not be mailed.

(5) The Attorney General shall adopt rules necessary to implement this section.

(6) It is an affirmative defense to a claim or charge of violating subsection (4) of this section that the originator of the sweepstakes promotion had, at the time of the violation, implemented reasonable practices or procedures for preventing a violation. [Formerly 646.879]

Law Review Cita­tions

52 WLR 451 (2016)

(formerly 646.315 to 646.375)

Notes of Decisions

Where purchaser fails to provide notice of condi­tion requiring repair, presump­tion does not arise that repair time exceeding 30 business days demonstrates inability of manufacturer to conform vehicle. Pavel v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., 127 Or App 16, 870 P2d 856 (1994)

Repair time exceeding 30 business days as evidence of inability to conform vehicle applies only to presently existing defect. Pavel v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., 127 Or App 16, 870 P2d 856 (1994)

Law Review Cita­tions

19 WLR 329 (1983)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 646A—Trade Regulation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors646A.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 646A, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano646A.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.