The conflict between AI agents and the business models of traditional internet companies has officially seen its first major confrontation in court. According toBloomberg NewsA U.S. federal court in San Francisco recently issued a preliminary ruling in favor of Amazon, ordering AI search startup Perplexity to suspend the use of its Comet web browser's AI agent feature to assist users in making purchases on Amazon's platform. This injunction not only requires Perplexity to cease access to password-protected account areas but also to destroy any Amazon data it has already acquired. This legal battle over "who has control over shopping" is profoundly influencing the future development of AI assistants.
The court's preliminary ruling: a 7-day appeal period and a document destruction order.
The legal battle was sparked by an innovative feature offered by Perplexity's Comet browser. This feature allowed users' AI agents to directly log into their Amazon accounts and automatically complete the tedious process of searching for products, comparing prices, and even placing orders and checking out.
In granting the temporary restraining order, San Francisco Federal Court Judge Maxine Chesney pointed out the legal controversy: "Amazon provided strong evidence that Perplexity, through its Comet browser, obtained authorization from 'Amazon users' but accessed password-protected user accounts 'without official authorization from Amazon'."
According to the court order, Perplexity has one week to appeal. If the appeal fails or is abandoned, Perplexity must immediately cease its AI bots' access to any password-protected areas of Amazon's systems and, during the ongoing litigation, must completely destroy all Amazon internal data it has copied or scraped.
User choice vs. Platform Terms of Service
Looking back at the timeline of the conflict, Amazon had already issued a "cease-and-desist" order to Perplexity regarding these AI shopping bots as early as November of last year.Warning LetterFurthermore, it was alleged that using Comet as a proxy for purchases constituted a serious violation of Amazon's Terms of Service.
An Amazon spokesperson told Bloomberg News, "This preliminary injunction will prevent Perplexity from gaining unauthorized access to Amazon stores, which is an important step in maintaining a trustworthy shopping experience for Amazon customers."
On the other hand, Perplexity, facing restrictions on its core functions, is playing the "user rights" card. A company representative responded strongly to this week's ruling, stating, "Perplexity will continue to fight for the right of internet users to 'choose any AI they want'."
Analysis of viewpoints
This seemingly simple lawsuit for "breach of service" is actually a battle for survival between the Web 2.0 platform giant and the disruptors of the Web 3.0/AI era.
From a user's perspective, having an AI proxy shop on their behalf is undoubtedly incredibly convenient. However, from Amazon's business perspective, it's a nightmare. Amazon's profit model has long since moved beyond simply "taking a cut from sales." Larger profits come from in-site advertising (retail media), featured product exposure, and impulse purchases by Prime members. When an AI proxy becomes the "sole intermediary" between the user and the e-commerce platform, Amazon's carefully designed recommendation algorithms, banner ads, and promotional layouts will become completely ineffective—because AI robots don't watch ads and don't engage in impulse purchases.
Amazon's aggressive pursuit of an injunction is not only aimed at blocking Perplexity, but also at serving as a warning to all tech companies attempting to develop "agentic AI": do not attempt to bypass the platform's advertising window and directly access the checkout process without permission. How to define the legal boundary between "user authorization" and "platform authorization" will be the biggest key to the successful commercialization of all future AI assistants.
