Can Brands Use Anti-Hacking Laws to Stop AI Shopping Agents?

Can companies stop AI shopping agents from accessing their websites? That question is at the center of a closely-watched dispute between Amazon and Perplexity AI. In a newly-issued decision, the Ninth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction entered to prevent the use of Perplexity’s agentic browser tool on Amazon.com, holding that Amazon is unlikely to succeed on its claim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) because, on the current record, it is the user – not Perplexity – that “accesses” Amazon’s computers.

The case centers on Comet, Perplexity’s AI-enabled browser. Comet users can instruct its optional AI assistant to perform tasks on their behalf. When directed to locate an item on Amazon.com, the AI assistant takes screenshots of the browser view, sends them from the user’s computer to Perplexity’s servers, and receives instructions from those servers on how to navigate Amazon.

In its November 2025 complaint, Amazon brought claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) and California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (“CDAFA”), alleging that Comet accessed Amazon.com without authorization. Granting a preliminary injunction earlier this year, the Northern District of California found that Amazon had presented strong evidence that Perplexity accessed users’ password-protected accounts – via Comet – without Amazon’s authorization and had demonstrated a likelihood of success on…