Perplexity has won a decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that overturns a preliminary injunction that barred its AI‑driven shopping tool, built into the Comet browser, from accessing Amazon’s website.
Appeals court finds Amazon’s CFAA claim unsubstantiated
The appellate panel concluded that the retailer’s allegation that Perplexity violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) did not meet the legal threshold. To succeed on a CFAA claim, a plaintiff must show that the defendant intentionally accessed a protected computer without permission, obtained data, and caused a loss averaging at least $5,000 per year.
The court said the Comet browser requires a user to direct each interaction, meaning the user—not Perplexity—was the party accessing the retailer’s servers. Consequently, the panel held that an injunction “against conduct that likely does not violate the CFAA … would not serve the public interest.”
Related: Keep Your Phone Cool in the Car
Background of the dispute
The retailer first contacted Perplexity in November 2025 with a cease‑and‑desist letter demanding that the firm block its AI browser from reaching the storefront. It said the two firms had reached a pause on “agentic shopping” in 2024, but the startup allegedly re‑enabled the feature by making Comet appear as a standard Chrome browser.
In March 2026, the retailer filed a lawsuit in a San Francisco federal court and secured a temporary injunction that forced the company to limit Comet’s ability to query the site. The order was meant to stop what the plaintiff described as “unauthorized scraping” of product listings.
Perplexity appealed, arguing that the injunction overreached and that its software merely facilitated user‑initiated searches, not autonomous data collection.
Related: T‑Mobile acknowledges mistake, aims to restore free lines
“We respectfully disagree with today’s decision on the preliminary injunction,” the retailer said in a statement to Engadget. “We remain confident in our case and are evaluating our next steps.”
The appellate ruling does not end the underlying lawsuit. The retailer can seek a rehearing, petition the Supreme Court, or continue the case in the district court where it was originally filed.
The case continues.
