A federal appeals court has overturned a ruling that blocked Perplexity's AI shopping tool from accessing Amazon. The decision, issued on August 4, 2026, by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, removes a court order that had been granted in Amazon's favor in March. The underlying lawsuit between the two companies is not over, though, and will continue in a San Francisco federal court. Engadget

The court found that Amazon's main legal argument did not hold up. Amazon had relied on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or CFAA, a federal law originally designed to prosecute hackers. The court's reasoning came down to how Perplexity's Comet browser works: because a person has to tell the browser what to do, the court decided that it is the user, not Perplexity, who is accessing Amazon's computers. The court said that blocking conduct that likely does not break the law would not serve the public interest. Engadget

The conflict started in November 2025, when Amazon sent Perplexity a letter demanding it stop its AI browser from reaching Amazon's online store. Amazon filed a lawsuit in March 2026, and a federal judge agreed to temporarily block Perplexity's Comet browser from pulling data from Amazon's website. The judge described the case as an early test of AI tools that shop and buy things on a user's behalf. CNBC

Amazon had accused Perplexity of secretly accessing private Amazon customer accounts through the Comet browser. Reuters. The Ninth Circuit had already given Perplexity a temporary break, allowing its shopping bots to keep working on Amazon while the appeal was pending, as reported on March 17, 2026. Bloomberg

Amazon told Engadget it "respectfully disagrees with the Ninth Circuit's decision on the preliminary injunction, remains confident in its case, and is evaluating its next steps." Amazon can ask the Ninth Circuit to hear the case again or take it to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case, officially called 'Amazon.com Services, LLC v. Perplexity AI, Inc.', will continue in the San Francisco federal court where it was first filed. Engadget

The broader question here is who bears responsibility when an AI tool interacts with a website on a person's behalf. The court's answer was that the person using the tool is the one accessing the site, not the company that made the tool. Think of it like a travel agent booking a flight for you: the airline sees your booking, not the agent's. This is a meaningful distinction because the laws at issue were written before AI assistants existed, and courts are now deciding how to apply them.

For companies that run websites, the ruling makes it harder to use the CFAA to block AI tools from reaching their pages. Amazon's lawsuit is still active, but the appeals court's focus on public interest means that getting a court order to block these tools will be more difficult going forward. The outcome leaves website operators more reliant on their own technical barriers, such as systems that detect and block automated traffic, rather than on judges to keep AI agents out.