Background
Amazon sued Perplexity on 4 November 2025, pleading claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act. In the complaint, Amazon framed the case not as an attempt to block AI development, but as a case about ‘persistent, covert, and unauthorized access’ to Amazon’s protected computer systems. Amazon alleged that Perplexity’s Comet browser accessed password-protected customer-account areas on Amazon’s website after Amazon had repeatedly told Perplexity that such agentic access was not permitted. Amazon also alleged that Perplexity continued after notice, after Amazon introduced access controls, and after a cease-and-desist letter. The case then moved quickly into interim-relief litigation. Amazon filed its preliminary injunction motion the same day as the complaint. Perplexity opposed that motion on 25 November 2025. Amazon replied on 10 December 2025. Perplexity later filed a supplemental brief on 15 January 2026. The court heard the motion on 6 March 2026 and granted preliminary injunctive relief on 9 March 2026. Perplexity filed its notice of appeal on 10 March 2026. (Complaint, ECF No. 1; PI motion, ECF No. 4; opposition, ECF No. 35; reply, ECF No. 40; supplemental brief, ECF No. 60; order, ECF No. 81; notice of appeal, ECF No. 82.)
AI Interaction
The AI issue is central to the dispute. Amazon described Comet as a browser with ‘agentic AI’ functionality able to carry out multi-step tasks on a user’s behalf, including shopping through the user’s private Amazon account. Amazon’s theory was that these AI agents could act within password-protected systems, use stored credentials, and perform actions that resembled ordinary human browsing even when no human was actively clicking. Amazon further alleged that Perplexity did not transparently identify this agentic activity and instead configured Comet to present itself using the same user-agent string as Google Chrome, making the traffic appear to be ordinary human browser activity rather than AI-agent activity. Amazon’s motion also said that, on 12 September and 29 September 2025, Amazon told Perplexity’s leadership that Comet AI was not authorised to access the Amazon Store without transparent identification, and that Perplexity nonetheless continued. In the 9 March 2026 order, Judge Chesney defined ‘AI agents’ as 'software or a computer program deployed through [Comet] that can autonomously or semi-autonomously perform actions and interact with third-party websites on behalf of, or at the instruction of, a user.' That definition is important because it shows the court was addressing agentic browser conduct specifically, not AI systems in general. (PI motion, ECF No. 4; order, ECF No. 81.)
Note:
The Ninth Circuit’s Preliminary Injunction Time Schedule Notice (ECF No. 88.). It shows that the appeal is now on an expedited interlocutory timetable. Perplexity’s mediation questionnaire was due on 16 March 2026, Perplexity’s preliminary injunction opening brief is due on 8 April 2026, and Amazon’s answering brief is due on 6 May 2026.