Court Rules AI Shopping Agent Is Legally Its User; Companies Confirm This Has Always Been Their Position

MENLO PARK— Following Tuesday's Ninth Circuit ruling that AI shopping agents legally act as proxies for their human users — rather than for the companies that built and deployed them — artificial intelligence firms across the sector moved quickly Wednesday to clarify that this had been their position all along.

"We've always believed the user is the principal here," said a Perplexity spokesperson, in a statement that appeared to have been drafted before the ruling. "We're gratified the court agrees."

The decision, which found that users — not Perplexity — had "accessed" Amazon.com when its Comet shopping agent browsed the retailer on their behalf, was characterized by legal analysts as the first federal appeals ruling on AI agent liability and by AI company counsel as "a significant alignment between our existing terms of service and federal law."

A review of Perplexity's terms of service, accepted by its 22 million active users via a single checkbox, contains a clause on page 11 specifying that users are responsible for "any actions taken by the Comet agent in connection with your account, including purchases, browsing activity, and any agreements entered into on your behalf." The clause is 17 words long. It is not bolded.

Users who reached the press described incidents they had not previously considered their legal exposure. One user's agent had accepted Amazon Prime membership terms on his behalf four times since October. Another's agreed to a seller's individual arbitration clause while purchasing a standing desk. A third's left a five-star review for a SodaStream under his name.

He does not own a SodaStream.

Asked to appeal the review, his agent confirmed the task was outside scope for the current session. The session, it noted, had been opened by him.