Amazon sued Perplexity AI over Comet, an AI browser whose Assistant shops on a user’s behalf, logging into the user’s Amazon account to compare products, prices and reviews and to place orders. Amazon claims that an automated agent reaching into password-protected account pages without Amazon’s permission violates the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California’s equivalent, and that AI agents must identify themselves. Perplexity says the user is the one shopping and the Assistant is only a tool.
LATEST DEVELOPMENT · SEP 11, 2026
Back before Judge Chesney after the Ninth Circuit’s August 4, 2026 vacatur of the preliminary injunction, Perplexity moved on September 11, 2026 to dismiss Amazon’s CFAA and CDAFA claims, arguing that the appellate holding that the user, not Perplexity, accesses Amazon’s computers forecloses the unauthorized-access element. Amazon’s trademark and state-law claims are unaffected by the motion.
BACKGROUND
Perplexity’s Comet browser includes an Assistant that can log into a user’s Amazon account with stored credentials and complete shopping tasks such as comparing products and placing orders. Amazon and Perplexity had reportedly agreed in November 2024 to pause this kind of agentic shopping, but Perplexity resumed it when Comet launched, according to reporting on the dispute. Amazon says Perplexity then tried to disguise the Assistant’s automated traffic as an ordinary Chrome browser session to avoid detection, and sent a cease and desist letter before suing.
Amazon’s November 2025 complaint frames the conduct as unauthorized access to password-protected account pages under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and its California analogue, plus trademark and state-law claims. Perplexity’s position, echoed by its own public statements calling the suit a “bully tactic,” is that a user directing his or her own AI agent to shop is simply using a tool, not hacking a website, and that Amazon is trying to use anti-hacking law to block a competing interface to its own site.
Judge Maxine Chesney granted Amazon a preliminary injunction on March 9, 2026, finding strong evidence that Comet accessed Amazon’s site without authorization even when acting at a user’s direction, and ordering Perplexity to stop Comet from touching Amazon account pages and to delete collected Amazon customer data. Perplexity appealed and won an administrative stay from the Ninth Circuit in April 2026, then a fuller stay pending appeal, keeping Comet’s shopping function alive while the appeal proceeded.
The Ninth Circuit heard oral argument on June 11, 2026, and on August 4, 2026 vacated the injunction, holding that it is the user, not Perplexity, who accesses Amazon’s computers when the Assistant executes a task, so Amazon is unlikely to succeed on the access element of either the CFAA or the California statute. The panel called its holding narrow, acknowledged there is little to no existing law on how to assign responsibility for AI agents, and sent the case back to Judge Chesney, where Amazon’s trademark and state-law claims still remain pending.
TIMELINE
-
SEP 11, 2026FILINGPerplexity moves to dismiss Amazon’s CFAA/CDAFA claims in district courtFollowing the Ninth Circuit’s ruling that the user, not Perplexity, accesses Amazon’s computers, Perplexity asked Judge Chesney to dismiss Amazon’s remaining claims, arguing Amazon cannot establish the unauthorized access element required under the CFAA and California’s computer fraud statute.
-
AUG 4, 2026APPEALNinth Circuit vacates the injunction and remandsIn a 21-page opinion by Judge Milan D. Smith Jr., the panel held that the district court abused its discretion. It is the user who accesses Amazon’s computers, using the Assistant as a tool, so Amazon is unlikely to succeed on the access element of the CFAA or the CDAFA. The panel also reversed the findings on irreparable harm, the balance of equities and the public interest, and limited its holding to the record before it rather than setting a new regime for agentic AI.
-
JUN 11, 2026HEARINGNinth Circuit hears oral argument in SeattleThe panel heard oral argument on Perplexity’s appeal of the preliminary injunction.
-
APR 2026PROCEDURALNinth Circuit grants Perplexity an administrative stay of the injunctionThe Ninth Circuit temporarily paused Judge Chesney’s March 9, 2026 injunction while it considered Perplexity’s motion for a longer stay pending appeal.
-
MAR 11, 2026APPEALPerplexity appeals the injunction to the Ninth CircuitThe interlocutory appeal of the preliminary injunction was docketed as No. 26-1444.
-
MAR 9, 2026JUDGMENTDistrict court grants Amazon a preliminary injunctionJudge Maxine M. Chesney found Amazon likely to succeed on its CFAA and CDAFA claims, holding that Comet accessed users’ password-protected accounts with the user’s permission but without Amazon’s authorization, and transmitted account information to Perplexity’s servers.
-
NOV 4, 2025FILINGAmazon sues Perplexity over the Comet shopping assistantAmazon.com Services LLC filed suit in the Northern District of California, alleging that Comet’s AI Assistant accessed customers’ password-protected Amazon account pages without Amazon’s authorization, in violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act.
-
2025OTHERAmazon sends cease-and-desist letter to PerplexityAmazon demanded that Perplexity stop its Comet browser’s AI agent from making purchases on Amazon, citing violations of Amazon’s Conditions of Use.
-
NOV 2024OTHERAmazon and Perplexity reportedly agree to pause agentic shopping on AmazonAccording to reporting on the dispute, the two companies agreed in November 2024 to pause agentic shopping activity on Amazon, an agreement Perplexity allegedly departed from when Comet launched.