<\/p>\n
A US federal court in San Francisco has issued a preliminary injunction against Perplexity AI, blocking its autonomous shopping tools from accessing password-protected Amazon.com, marking a significant legal move in regulating AI-run automation on proprietary systems.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
A US federal court in San Francisco has granted Amazon a preliminary injunction that prevents Perplexity AI from using its agentic shopping tools to access password-protected parts of Amazon.com, dealing a significant legal setback to the AI search startup. According to Bloomberg and legal reporting, the order bars Perplexity\u2019s Comet browser and associated AI agents from interacting with Amazon\u2019s systems and requires the deletion of Amazon data obtained through such access. (This ruling stems from a lawsuit Amazon filed in November.) Sources: Bloomberg, Mlex, Forbes.
\nAccording to The Guardian and other reporting, Amazon\u2019s complaint says Perplexity\u2019s Comet browser and its autonomous agents were entering customers\u2019 accounts and extracting product listings, prices and reviews while concealing that the activity was automated, behaviour Amazon contends violates its terms and federal computer-fraud statutes. Industry accounts emphasise Amazon\u2019s framing of the conduct as posing \u201csecurity risks\u201d to customer data. Sources: The Guardian, Investing, Bloomberg.
\nLegal analysts say the judge\u2019s decision underscores an emerging rule: AI agents cannot operate against platform owners\u2019 electronic systems without explicit permission. Reporting in Forbes notes the court found Perplexity\u2019s agents accessed password-protected accounts without authorisation, signalling courts are prepared to curb agentic scraping that acts on users\u2019 behalves. Sources: Forbes, Mlex.
\nFor Perplexity the implications are immediate and practical. The startup\u2019s shopping capability , positioned as a differentiator in the crowded AI assistant market by directly locating and comparing products for users , is materially weakened if it cannot reach Amazon\u2019s catalogue, widely regarded as the largest online retail inventory in the United States. Observers say losing Amazon access diminishes a core utility that helps drive consumer adoption. Sources: TechBuzz, Engadget, Investing.
\nCourt filings and reporting indicate the injunction met the four-factor test for preliminary relief, including a finding that Amazon would suffer irreparable harm absent intervention; the judge ordered that any copies of Amazon\u2019s data in Perplexity\u2019s possession be destroyed and enjoined the company from using agentic functionality to transact on Amazon\u2019s site. Legal coverage emphasises the order is temporary pending further proceedings and may be appealed. Sources: Mlex, Forbes, Engadget.
\nPerplexity faces a limited set of strategic choices: pursue an appeal and litigate the injunction, seek a commercial licence or technical arrangements with Amazon, or re-engineer its shopping features to rely on partners willing to grant access. Each route carries costs, legal uncertainty, licensing fees, or reduced product completeness, and could shape other startups\u2019 strategies when dealing with dominant platforms. Sources: Bloomberg, Investing, TechBuzz.
\nBeyond the parties to this dispute, regulators and industry watchers are watching closely. The decision feeds into broader debates over whether large platforms must open access to automated agents or may lawfully police interactions to protect user accounts and proprietary data. European and US regulators are already examining market power and AI training practices, and commentators say this case may influence forthcoming policy and litigation over how autonomous systems may use online services. Sources: The Guardian, Forbes, Bloomberg.<\/p>\n
Inspired by headline at:<\/strong> [1]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n Sources by paragraph:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n