As consumers increasingly seek ways to navigate rising prices, AI-driven tools are emerging to streamline comparison shopping. However, **Amazon** is taking legal action against these tools, drawing parallels to tactics previously employed by **Facebook** and **RyanAir**. ### Perplexity's AI Browser Under Fire At the center of the dispute is **Perplexity**, the creator of the AI-enabled web browser **Comet**. This browser allows users to automate tasks such as finding the best price for a product and completing the purchase. **Amazon** alleges that **Perplexity** violated the **CFAA** by developing a tool that accesses and interacts with its website. ### Court Ruling and the CFAA A federal district court sided with **Amazon**, relying on the Ninth Circuit's decision in *Facebook v Power Ventures*. Critics argue that the court should have instead followed the precedent set in *hiQ Labs*, which offered a more applicable reasoning. **Perplexity** has appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit. ### EFF's Amicus Brief and Concerns The **Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)** filed an amicus brief supporting **Perplexity**, warning of potential unintended consequences if the district court's ruling is upheld. They argue that an overbroad interpretation of the **CFAA** could stifle research, security, competition, and innovation. The **EFF** emphasizes that the **CFAA** was intended to target actual hacking that bypasses computer security, not to prevent legitimate data scraping from publicly available websites. The current interpretation could hinder journalists and academic researchers who use various testing accounts for research purposes. ### Impact on Competition A broad reading of the **CFAA** in this case could undermine competition by allowing companies to restrict data scraping, a crucial method for price comparison websites. The Ninth Circuit is urged to interpret the **CFAA** narrowly, preventing website owners from using it as a shield against independent accountability.