A San Francisco federal court has issued a preliminary injunction against Perplexity, preventing the company from using its Comet browser’s artificial intelligence agent to access Amazon’s
password-protected areas for customer shopping purposes.
This ruling represents a significant early legal development in the emerging sector of agentic commerce, where AI-powered assistants browse websites, compare products, and make purchases for consumers. The case raises a crucial question about digital access rights when AI agents interact with online retailers.
Senior U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney, in granting the injunction on Monday, determined that Amazon has a strong likelihood of prevailing on claims that Perplexity violated both the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California’s computer fraud law.
The ruling makes an important legal distinction, noting that while Comet accesses Amazon accounts with user permission, it does so “without authorization by Amazon.”
Perplexity’s legal arguments suggested that Amazon’s primary concern wasn’t cybersecurity but rather eliminating competition to its own AI shopping capabilities. The startup, based in San Francisco, claimed that AI agents circumvent the advertising displayed to human users, and that protecting advertising revenue was Amazon’s true motivation for filing the lawsuit.
Amazon’s lawsuit alleged that Perplexity intentionally masked Comet’s AI agent to appear as a standard Google Chrome browser session, avoiding detection instead of openly identifying itself.
According to Amazon, the company issued at least five warnings to Perplexity beginning in November 2024, requesting cessation of the practice. Amazon implemented technical measures to block Comet’s access in August 2025, only to see Perplexity release an update within a day that circumvented the barrier.
An Amazon spokesperson stated Tuesday that the preliminary injunction would halt Perplexity’s unauthorized access to the Amazon marketplace and represents a crucial step in preserving a trustworthy shopping experience for customers. The spokesperson added that Amazon looks forward to continuing its case in court.
Perplexity has not released a public statement regarding the preliminary injunction as of yet.
In earlier statements, the company characterized the lawsuit as “a bully tactic” and maintained that consumers should have the freedom to use any AI assistant of their choosing for online shopping. A November blog post from the company argued that Amazon should embrace agentic shopping because it results in increased transactions and improved customer satisfaction.
Amazon CEO Andy Jassy has recognized that agentic commerce could prove beneficial for e-commerce, though he noted that current AI agents lack sufficient capabilities in personalization and pricing accuracy. Amazon operates its own AI shopping features, including Rufus and Buy For Me.
The Monday ruling includes a seven-day stay on the injunction, allowing Perplexity to petition the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to suspend it during the company’s appeal process.
Judge Chesney rejected Perplexity’s request for a $1 billion bond, which the company had sought based on its market value and Comet investment. The judge reasoned that the injunction doesn’t pose a threat to Perplexity’s entire business operation, as Comet remains functional on all other websites.
The case highlights the evolving legal landscape surrounding AI-powered commerce and the tension between innovation and established platform control. As AI assistants become more sophisticated in their ability to act on behalf of users, courts will likely face additional disputes over access rights, authorization, and the boundaries between legitimate technology use and unauthorized access to digital services. The outcome of this case could establish important precedents for how AI agents interact with e-commerce platforms and other online services in the future.