9th Circuit vacates Amazon injunction against Perplexity Comet
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco vacated a preliminary injunction that had barred Perplexity AI's Comet shopping agent from Amazon's platform Reuters, dealing a significant setback to Amazon's legal bid to restrict the AI agent's operation on its site.
On August 4, 2026, the three-judge appellate panel concluded that Amazon was unlikely to succeed on its core claim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which prohibits unauthorized access to computer systems. The court's reasoning hinged on a fundamental distinction: users of Perplexity's tool, not Perplexity itself, initiated access to Amazon's servers Reuters. That user-directed access, the panel found, did not constitute a violation under federal computer-access law.
What the ruling means for AI agents
Circuit Judge Milan Smith, writing for the panel, emphasized the implications for emerging technology: "An injunction would impair consumer choice and needlessly limit development of a nascent technology." MediaPost The decision reflects a judicial stance that protects user agency in how they deploy AI tools, even when those tools operate in automated fashion across third-party platforms.
The Knight First Amendment Institute noted the court also found Amazon unlikely to prevail on its state-law claims under California's Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (CDAFA) Knight First Amendment Institute, narrowing the grounds on which Amazon could pursue further restrictions.
Background and business impact
Perplexity's Comet shopping agent enables users to browse and compare products on Amazon and other e-commerce platforms through an AI interface. Amazon sought the injunction in lower court to block the tool's access to its platform, arguing it violated federal and state computer-fraud laws. The district court granted the preliminary relief, but the appellate panel's reversal now restores Perplexity's ability to operate Comet on Amazon without court-ordered obstruction.
This ruling establishes important precedent for the AI agent economy: consumer-initiated use of AI tools to access third-party services is unlikely to face successful CFAA-based blocking injunctions, even when those services object to automated access. The decision opens the door for Perplexity to continue operating its shopping agent and potentially encourages other AI companies to build similar cross-platform tools without fear of preliminary injunctions.
The case now returns to the lower court, where Amazon may pursue further litigation on other grounds, but the appellate court's findings significantly constrain the legal theory it originally relied on.