Ninth Circuit lifts CFAA injunction on Perplexity Comet browser

The Ninth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction on August 4 that had barred Perplexity's Comet browser and AI shopping assistant from Amazon.com, holding that the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act does not reach an AI tool acting on a shopper's behalf. PYMNTS reported the unanimous panel decision in Amazon v. Perplexity. Two experts in our Who's Who directory circulated the ruling this week.

Writing for the panel, Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. concluded that "Amazon is unlikely to prevail on its claims under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) because...it is Amazon's customers—not Perplexity—that access Amazon's computer systems." Smith added that "the CFAA remains principally an anti-hacking statute," and framed Perplexity's assistant as a "software tool helping the user perform requested tasks," not an independent actor breaking into a protected system.

Amazon sued Perplexity last November, arguing that Comet was unlawfully touching password-protected customer accounts in violation of the CFAA and California's Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act. A district court granted the injunction in March. The Ninth Circuit called Amazon's irreparable-harm arguments "relatively weak" against the hardship of keeping Perplexity's product off the market.

The opinion leans on Van Buren v. United States, hiQ Labs, and Nosal, and the panel was careful to tie its holding to the CFAA's "access" requirement and the specific technology in front of it, leaving room for a different outcome with more autonomous AI systems. Amazon said it disagreed with the ruling and is evaluating next steps; Perplexity characterized the decision as affirming consumer choice over AI tools. The dispute likely shifts to contract law, terms of service, and AI-specific regulatory frameworks.