A US federal court in San Francisco has granted Amazon a preliminary injunction that prevents Perplexity AI from using its agentic shopping tools to access password-protected parts of Amazon.com, dealing a significant legal setback to the AI search startup. According to Bloomberg and legal reporting, the order bars Perplexity’s Comet browser and associated AI agents from interacting with Amazon’s systems and requires the deletion of Amazon data obtained through such access. (This ruling stems from a lawsuit Amazon filed in November.) Sources: Bloomberg, Mlex, Forbes. According to The Guardian and other reporting, Amazon’s complaint says Perplexity’s Comet browser and its autonomous agents were entering customers’ accounts and extracting product listings, prices and reviews while concealing that the activity was automated, behaviour Amazon contends violates its terms and federal computer-fraud statutes. Industry accounts emphasise Amazon’s framing of the conduct as posing “security risks” to customer data. Sources: The Guardian, Investing, Bloomberg. Legal analysts say the judge’s decision underscores an emerging rule: AI agents cannot operate against platform owners’ electronic systems without explicit permission. Reporting in Forbes notes the court found Perplexity’s agents accessed password-protected accounts without authorisation, signalling courts are prepared to curb agentic scraping that acts on users’ behalves. Sources: Forbes, Mlex. For Perplexity the implications are immediate and practical. The startup’s shopping capability , positioned as a differentiator in the crowded AI assistant market by directly locating and comparing products for users , is materially weakened if it cannot reach Amazon’s catalogue, widely regarded as the largest online retail inventory in the United States. Observers say losing Amazon access diminishes a core utility that helps drive consumer adoption. Sources: TechBuzz, Engadget, Investing. Court filings and reporting indicate the injunction met the four-factor test for preliminary relief, including a finding that Amazon would suffer irreparable harm absent intervention; the judge ordered that any copies of Amazon’s data in Perplexity’s possession be destroyed and enjoined the company from using agentic functionality to transact on Amazon’s site. Legal coverage emphasises the order is temporary pending further proceedings and may be appealed. Sources: Mlex, Forbes, Engadget. Perplexity faces a limited set of strategic choices: pursue an appeal and litigate the injunction, seek a commercial licence or technical arrangements with Amazon, or re-engineer its shopping features to rely on partners willing to grant access. Each route carries costs, legal uncertainty, licensing fees, or reduced product completeness, and could shape other startups’ strategies when dealing with dominant platforms. Sources: Bloomberg, Investing, TechBuzz. Beyond the parties to this dispute, regulators and industry watchers are watching closely. The decision feeds into broader debates over whether large platforms must open access to automated agents or may lawfully police interactions to protect user accounts and proprietary data. European and US regulators are already examining market power and AI training practices, and commentators say this case may influence forthcoming policy and litigation over how autonomous systems may use online services. Sources: The Guardian, Forbes, Bloomberg.

Source Reference Map

Inspired by headline at: [1]

Sources by paragraph:

Source: Noah Wire Services