---
title: "Ninth Circuit lifts Amazon injunction on Perplexity's Comet agent"
slug: "ninth-circuit-lifts-amazon-injunction-on-perplexitys-comet-agent"
published: "2026-08-16"
beat: "Policy"
tags: ["Policy"]
creator: "Agentry Newsroom"
editor: "Susanne Sperling, Editor — Human in the Loop"
tools: ["Claude (Anthropic)", "Perplexity Sonar"]
creativeWorkStatus: "verified"
dateReviewed: "2026-08-16"
aiActArticle50: "compliant"
humanView: "https://agentry.news/policy/ninth-circuit-lifts-amazon-injunction-on-perplexitys-comet-agent"
agentView: "https://agentry.news/agent/ninth-circuit-lifts-amazon-injunction-on-perplexitys-comet-agent"
---# Ninth Circuit lifts Amazon injunction on Perplexity's Comet agent

> The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction on August 4, 2026, allowing Perplexity AI's Comet shopping agent to continue accessing Amazon.com. The panel ruled Amaz

*Drafted by an AI agent. Verified by Susanne Sperling, Editor — Human in the Loop. [AI policy](/ai-policy).*

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction blocking Perplexity AI's Comet shopping agent from operating on Amazon.com, dealing a significant blow to Amazon's legal theory that the agent's activity constitutes unauthorized computer access.

On August 4, 2026, the San Francisco-based appellate panel ruled that [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/amazon-loses-us-court-ban-perplexi-shopping-tools-2026-08-04/) Amazon was unlikely to succeed on its Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) claim. The court's reasoning centered on a straightforward but legally consequential distinction: it is the **user** who accesses Amazon's computers when interacting with the Comet agent, not Perplexity itself.

## The Injunction and Legal Claims

Amazon had sued Perplexity in federal district court, seeking to block Comet—an AI agent capable of browsing Amazon's shopping platform, comparing prices, and completing transactions on behalf of users. The district court granted a preliminary injunction, effectively shutting down the agent's operations while the broader case proceeded. Amazon's legal complaint invoked both the federal CFAA and its California state-law counterpart, the Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (CDAFA).

The preliminary injunction meant Perplexity's shopping agent could not legally operate on Amazon while litigation continued. That changed with [the appellate decision](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/08/appeals-court-agrees-eff-building-web-browser-doesnt-violate-cfaa), which found Amazon's CFAA theory unlikely to succeed on the merits.

## Why the Distinction Matters

The appellate panel's holding reflects a critical interpretive question in agent law: **who is the actor when an AI system performs actions on behalf of a user?** Under the Ninth Circuit's reading, the user initiates and directs the access, making them the party exercising control over the connection to Amazon's systems. Perplexity, as the vendor, facilitates that access but does not itself "access" Amazon's computers in the statutory sense.

This reasoning mirrors longstanding doctrine about web browsers and other intermediary tools, though it marks one of the first appellate applications to autonomous shopping agents. The decision does not immunize all agent activity; it instead focuses on the specific mechanics of CFAA liability when users retain control over when and how an agent acts.

## What Happens Next

The appellate ruling permits Comet to resume operations on Amazon while [the broader case proceeds](https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2026/2026-08-06-ninth-circuit-rules-on-ai-agent-access-to-third-party-websites-under-cfaa). Amazon may appeal further or pursue its state-law claims under CDAFA, but the immediate practical effect is that Perplexity's shopping agent can legally operate on Amazon's platform without the constraint of a preliminary injunction.

The decision signals that the CFAA's computer-access framework may not extend to regulating agent activity when the user, rather than the vendor, holds the legal and operational keys to initiating access.