Amazon has issued a legal notice to Perplexity, demanding that the AI company remove its agentic browsing application, Comet, from Amazon’s online store. This marks the first legal action Amazon has taken against an AI firm and underscores the growing tension between major tech platforms and the new wave of AI-powered browsing and shopping assistants.
In a blog post titled “Bullying is Not Innovation,” Perplexity confirmed that it had received Amazon’s letter and accused the e-commerce giant of trying to suppress innovation in the emerging field of agentic AI. The company argued that Amazon’s actions threaten the rights of internet users who prefer to shop using AI-driven tools.
Amazon’s Warning and Cease-and-Desist
According to Perplexity, Amazon had issued several warnings before escalating the matter into a legal threat. The letter accused Perplexity’s Comet of violating Amazon’s terms of service by failing to identify itself as an automated agent. Amazon maintains that when users employ Comet to browse or make purchases, the AI functions as a third-party bot and must disclose its identity.
Perplexity disputes this interpretation. The startup insists that Comet merely acts on behalf of human users, following their explicit instructions. From its perspective, this means the agent has “the same permissions” as the user and therefore does not need to identify itself as an AI.
Amazon firmly rejects this view. In a public statement, the company explained that other third-party agents performing similar tasks operate transparently. “It is how others do it,” Amazon said, citing examples such as food delivery apps, online travel agencies, and delivery services, which identify themselves when acting on behalf of customers.
The Transparency Debate
The conflict has sparked a wider discussion about transparency and accountability in AI commerce. Amazon’s stance is that third-party AI agents should clearly identify themselves to maintain fair and secure transactions. The company also suggested that any agent operating anonymously could be restricted or blocked from accessing its site.
In Amazon’s words, “It is straightforward that third-party applications offering to make purchases on behalf of customers should operate openly and respect service provider decisions about participation.”
Technically, Perplexity could comply by allowing Comet to self-identify when making purchases. However, the startup believes Amazon would block it altogether under the guise of compliance, ensuring continued control over shopping activity. Perplexity claims Amazon’s motives are commercial — that automated shoppers reduce exposure to ads and impulsive purchases, which are central to Amazon’s business model.
A History of Controversy
This dispute is the latest in a series of controversies surrounding Perplexity’s AI systems. Earlier this year, Cloudflare accused Perplexity of scraping websites that had explicitly opted out of allowing AI crawlers. Cloudflare alleged that Perplexity had concealed its activity to bypass restrictions.
Supporters defended Perplexity, saying it was simply accessing public pages upon user request, behavior similar to a human browsing the web. Critics countered that Perplexity’s approach lacked transparency and potentially violated site owners’ rights to control automated access.
The Cloudflare incident foreshadowed a larger issue that is now becoming central: as more people use AI-powered agents for shopping, travel, and price comparisons, companies must decide how to regulate these automated interactions. Should they block bots entirely, or find structured ways to work with them?
The Broader Impact
Perplexity argues that Amazon’s legal threat is not only about Comet but also about shaping the future of AI and e-commerce. The startup sees Amazon’s move as an attempt to set a restrictive precedent, giving large corporations control over which AI agents can access their platforms.
Amazon, on the other hand, maintains that its approach protects customers and ensures fair business practices. By requiring agents like Comet to identify themselves, Amazon believes it can preserve trust and safety while allowing businesses to choose how they interact with AI systems.
The Road Ahead
This dispute highlights one of the core challenges in the evolving landscape of agentic AI. On one side, companies like Perplexity advocate for open, autonomous systems that act freely on behalf of users. On the other, platforms like Amazon aim to maintain compliance, protect users, and safeguard their business models.
Whether Amazon’s actions are an overreach or a reasonable precaution remains open to debate. What is certain is that this clash could set an important precedent for how AI agents interact with online ecosystems in the years to come.
As Perplexity summarized in its blog post: “This is Amazon’s first legal salvo against an AI company, and it is a threat to all internet users.”
As AI continues to redefine the boundaries of online commerce, the line between human and machine interaction grows thinner, and the struggle between innovation and regulation is just beginning.
