Amazon.com warns Perplexity its shopping bot isn’t welcome • The Register

Amazon.com has despatched a stop and desist letter to Perplexity through which it insists the AI firm stop its Comet browser from making automated purchases on behalf of customers.

Comet, like OpenAI’s Atlas and several other different browsers, contains a big language mannequin that may automate net looking and do issues like make on-line purchases when instructed by customers.

Each side are going to must bleed earlier than they notice that they are higher off working collectively

Amazon argues that third-party purposes able to making purchases on behalf of its prospects ought to search permission from the e-commerce large earlier than enabling that functionality, to make sure a constructive buyer expertise.

“Agentic third-party purposes equivalent to Perplexity’s Comet have the identical obligations, and we have repeatedly requested that Perplexity take away Amazon from the Comet expertise, significantly in mild of the considerably degraded buying and customer support expertise it offers,” the corporate stated in a statement.

The Register understands that Perplexity’s software program tries to keep away from detection with the intention to work together with Amazon’s net retailer. Reddit’s lawsuit against Perplexity makes the same declare about Comet attempting to work stealthily.

One other of Amazon’s considerations seems to be that Comet’s AI agent might buy merchandise aside from these the e-commerce large’s customized product suggestions counsel.

Amazon might make its personalization knowledge accessible to Perplexity’s Comet if the 2 firms selected to cooperate, however which may additionally entail monetary consideration in change for the info integration. Plus Amazon might choose to focus by itself native AI agent, Rufus.

Coincidentally, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos invested in Perplexity final 12 months by his Bezos Expeditions Fund.

Perplexity objects to Amazon’s demand and has printed a prolonged blog post characterizing the e-tail large’s stance as “a risk to all web customers.”

That overstates the recognition of AI brokers for e-commerce. In response to a February 2025 survey of 1,026 US respondents by Omnisend, “66 p.c of customers refuse to let AI make purchases for them, even when it guarantees higher offers.” However it might be that curiosity in automated on-line buying is rising.

In any occasion, Perplexity considers Amazon’s calls for to be bullying.

The AI firm’s authorized evaluation reads as if it had been written by AI.

“For the final 50 years, software program has been a device, like a wrench within the fingers of the person,” the corporate stated in its publish. “However with the rise of agentic AI, software program can be turning into labor: an assistant, an worker, an agent.

“The regulation is evident that giant firms don’t have any proper to cease you from proudly owning wrenches. At this time, Amazon introduced it doesn’t consider in your proper to rent labor, to have an assistant or an worker appearing in your behalf. This is not an inexpensive authorized place, it is a bully tactic to scare disruptive firms like Perplexity out of constructing life higher for folks.”

To be clear, your wrenches are secure. However software program touches on totally different authorized points and Perplexity’s claims about AI brokers are usually not clear even to authorized consultants. The corporate for instance says that AI brokers are distinct from crawlers, scrapers, and bots, with out explaining how that is so.

The corporate goes on to argue, “Publishers and firms don’t have any proper to discriminate towards customers based mostly on which AI they’ve chosen to signify them. Customers will need to have the appropriate to decide on applied sciences that signify them.”

The Register requested OpenAI and Anthropic whether or not both has acquired a stop and desist letter from Amazon associated to AI looking, however we have not heard again.

Perplexity didn’t reply to a request to say whether or not it intends to adjust to Amazon’s demand.

Santa Clara College regulation professor Eric Goldman advised The Register that Comet leverages the credentials of Amazon prospects to make purchases on their behalf and stated: “It’s doable for any service to limit how a person discloses their credentials. They may say of their phrases of service you can’t disclose your credentials to any third celebration.”

Goldman added that there are causes Amazon may not wish to try this, as a result of customers might discover it helpful to have companies that act as proxies on their behalf.

“So, for instance, loads of monetary apps will ask for banks’ login credentials in order that they will go and collect knowledge from the banks for the person but in addition doubtlessly allow transactions on their behalf,” Goldman defined. “So banks might shut that down. But when they do, they’re chopping off a section of customers who truly would worth that type of entry over some other.”

But when Amazon did disallow the disclosure of credentials beneath its phrases of service, Goldman stated, the person can be in breach of that settlement by sharing them with Comet, and Perplexity may face some further legal responsibility for appearing on credentials it is not alleged to have.

Goldman additionally stated Amazon might select to dam Comet particularly, if Amazon might reliably determine the browser – a challenge that has vexed firms which have tried to dam AI firm crawlers.

That is not a phrases of use query however a technical self-help treatment, Goldman stated.

Goldman stated it is unclear whether or not Amazon may prevail if it pursues a pc fraud declare in courtroom, ought to Perplexity refuses to barter or change its habits. “The courts are in full chaos on this query, particularly after [the US Supreme Court’s decision [PDF] in Van Buren v. United States]. No one actually is aware of something in regards to the legitimacy of scraping right this moment.”

Goldman added that what Comet is doing is probably not the identical as net scraping.

“Distinguishing between net looking, scraping, and agentic AI entry goes to be extraordinarily troublesome for the regulation,” he stated.

He stated the dispute reminds him of carriage contract battles between cable TV firms and broadcasters.

“It is like a type of issues the place either side are going to must bleed earlier than they notice that they are higher off working collectively,” he stated. “And that is what occurred in all these carriage disputes. As you understand, finally someone’s shedding some cash after which they begin speaking.” ®