ACLU Files Ninth Circuit Brief in Amazon-Perplexity CFAA Fight Over AI Agent
Updated
Updated · ACLU · Jun 11
ACLU Files Ninth Circuit Brief in Amazon-Perplexity CFAA Fight Over AI Agent
1 articles · Updated · ACLU · Jun 11
Summary
June 11's Ninth Circuit hearing drew an ACLU amicus brief arguing Amazon's case against Perplexity could expand anti-hacking liability far beyond Comet, the AI browser agent at issue.
Amazon says Comet's ability to shop on Amazon for logged-in users violates the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by automating interactions with account-accessible web pages.
The ACLU argues that theory would also expose developers and users of ordinary browser tools—price trackers, ad blockers, translators, accessibility software and research extensions—to civil or criminal claims.
At stake is whether platforms can use the CFAA to control how users access information already available in their own accounts, a precedent the ACLU says could chill journalism, research and web accessibility.
Can Amazon use an anti-hacking law to stop an AI from shopping for you, even with your permission?
Will this AI lawsuit decide who controls your internet experience: you or the websites you visit?
Amazon vs. Perplexity AI: Ninth Circuit Decision to Redefine AI Agent Access and Platform Control
Overview
The legal battle between Amazon and Perplexity AI has reached a turning point, with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals set to decide a case that could reshape the future of agentic AI and e-commerce. This high-stakes dispute has drawn widespread attention from the tech industry, as numerous third-party briefs highlight its broad impact. At the heart of the case is the question of who is responsible when an AI bot breaks established rules. The court’s decision will be closely watched by companies developing AI agents for commercial websites, as it will influence legal responsibility and future innovation in digital commerce.