• by Wendy Davis , 5 hours ago

Perplexity is pressing federal appellate judges to reverse an order banning its artificial intelligence shopping agent, Comet, from Amazon.

The ban was handed down by U.S. District Court Judge Maxine Chesney in the Northern District of California, who ruled in March that Amazon would likely prove its claim that Perplexity violates a 40-year-old anti-hacking law by allegedly accessing the retailer's site without its authorization. Chesney said in her ruling that Amazon provided "strong evidence" that Perplexity accesses Amazon users' password-protected accounts with their permission, but without Amazon's. 

The artificial intelligence company argues in papers filed Wednesday with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that Amazon's claims are "a fundamental misfit" for the federal anti-hacking law, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as a related California measure.

"There is no basis in the relevant statutes for this suit," Perplexity writes.

The battle dates to November, when Amazon claimed Perplexity was "trespassing" into Amazon.com's systems via the Comet browser. The retailer specifically alleged that Comet shopped for users and made purchases on their behalf, even after Amazon attempted to implement technological blocks and sent Perplexity a cease-and-desist letter.

Perplexity is now appealing Chesney's ruling to the 9th Circuit, which temporarily paused the ban while the appeal proceeds.

Among other arguments, Perplexity says it isn't the one that accessed Amazon. Instead, Perplexity argues, its users accessed the retailer's site.

Amazon disputes that interpretation, comparing Perplexity's users to intermediaries between itself and Amazon.com.

"Because Perplexity’s servers instruct its Comet AI agent to purposefully navigate the Amazon Store through a user’s computer, it can no more disclaim access than an arsonist could say, 'I didn’t send that mail bomb, the postman did,'" Amazon wrote.

Perplexity counters in its new papers that the mail bomb analogy is flawed.

"Amazon likens users of the Assistant to mere deliverymen carrying out Perplexity’s instructions, when in fact, the users are the ones activating and directing the Assistant," Perplexity writes.

The battle between the companies has drawn the interest of numerous outside groups, including digital rights groups and the company Mozilla, which are siding with Perplexity, and news organizations that are siding with Amazon.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Mozilla and others argued in a friend-of-the-court brief filed last month that Chesney's interpretation of the anti-hacking law is "antithetical to foundational principles of the open internet."

But the news industry organization Digital Content Next argues that publishers "should not be forced to open their 'gates' to AI agents."

The 9th Circuit is expected to hear oral arguments on June 11 in Seattle.