Our focus is thus to ask whether Perplexity uses a tool (the Assistant) to “access” Amazon’s computers. On the facts before us, we answer no. It is the user who “accesses” Amazon’s computers, with the help of the Assistant to carry out specific acts on Amazon.com. To be sure, Perplexity may receive screenshots of the user’s browser and may communicate instructions to the Assistant. But those activities, by themselves, do not mean that Perplexity has “accessed” (gained entry) to Amazon’s servers. [...]
Perplexity's Comet browser carries an agent that shops on Amazon inside a user's own account. Amazon told Perplexity before launch that its agents were not allowed in, told it again after, blocked the agent, and says it came back without the user-agent string that would identify it as one; whether that string was changed on purpose is still disputed. Amazon sued in November 2025 under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and won a preliminary injunction in March 2026. On 4 August the Ninth Circuit vacated it: the agent is a tool, not a person, and the person accessing Amazon is the user at the keyboard, so the federal hacking statute is not the instrument. What survives is Amazon's terms of service, rate limiting and technical blocking. The panel left open a record where the developer controls the agent closely enough to be the one gaining entry.
Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr., US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in CourtListener