Appeals court: it's the user, not the bot — Perplexity's shopping agent can return to Amazon
The Ninth Circuit on Tuesday threw out the March injunction that barred Perplexity's Comet agent from shopping on Amazon. The judges found Amazon unlikely to win its computer-hacking (CFAA) claim, because it is the user — not Perplexity — who 'accesses' Amazon when they send the agent to buy something, and noted there is almost no caselaw on assigning responsibility for AI agents. The underlying lawsuit continues; Amazon says it disagrees and is weighing next steps.
Why it mattersThis is the first appellate answer to a question the whole agent economy hangs on: when your AI acts for you online, the law sees you acting. If that reading holds, websites will struggle to ban agents with hacking statutes — the fight shifts to terms of service and technical blocks.
Read in the app — free, in 9 languages
Related stories
Nevada just cleared up to 8,000 driverless taxis for Las Vegas — Tesla's ceiling went from 10 to 5,000 in five weeks2026-08-21DeepSeek's cheap workhorse can now see — and on agent tasks that need eyes it says it is close to Anthropic's best
2026-08-21OpenAI has started a team whose stated worry is that a company like OpenAI ends up with too much power
2026-08-21Given four hours and a GPU to improve the way AI is trained, the best agent scored 0.25 out of 1 — and most never tried
2026-08-21ChatGPT can now read your iMessages and send them — and the setting that lets it skip asking is the one OpenAI warns about
2026-08-21