Perplexity published on November 4, 2025 that it received a legal threat from Amazon asking to block the use of AI assistants (Comet) on its platform. What looks like a technical dispute is actually a fight over user rights, privacy and who controls the online shopping experience.
What happened
Perplexity says Amazon asked to prohibit user assistants from accessing and buying on Amazon on behalf of the people who use them. In practice it’s simple: you ask your Comet assistant to search, compare and buy a product while you’re logged in. The credentials are, according to Perplexity, stored locally on your device, not on their servers.
Why did Amazon react? Perplexity points to a clear motive: keeping users inside an ecosystem monetized by ads, sponsored results and upsells. In other words, less autonomy for you and more commercial control for the platform.
Why this matters to you
Can you imagine delegating routine tasks to an assistant and suddenly not being able to use it where you shop? That convenience—saving time and reducing friction—is what’s at stake. For many people and small businesses, an agent acting with your permission is net productivity.
The dispute touches three important pillars: your right to choose the technology that represents you, the privacy of your credentials, and the possibility that big companies block services that compete with their business models.
What user agents are and why they matter
A user agent is your digital assistant that acts exactly with your permissions, at your request and in your interest. It’s not a crawler or a scraper; it doesn’t harvest data for a platform, it operates on your behalf.
For these agents to work as they should, Perplexity lays out three principles:
- Private. The assistant should operate indistinguishably from you, using your credentials and permissions. It should not centralize your keys or expose your identity.
- Personal. The agent works for you, not for the company that made it or third parties that want to manipulate your decisions.
- Powerful. It should be able to perform the tasks you actually need, without being limited by the commercial interests of platforms that profit from ads.
Risks: corporate control and loss of choice
If Amazon manages to impose restrictions, the risk isn’t just to Perplexity: it’s to any company that wants to offer useful assistants. The effect would be a more closed market where platforms prioritize ad revenue over user-centered experiences.
Who wins? The platform that controls the ecosystem. Who loses? You, because you lose choice and potentially the quality of the service.
What might happen and what you can do now
The dispute will likely escalate: litigation, regulatory pressure and public debate about interoperability and digital rights. It could also spark discussions about technical standards that let agents operate without endangering security and fair commerce.
If you use assistants or are an AI entrepreneur, consider:
- Choose solutions that store credentials locally and are transparent about permissions.
- Demand interoperability and open standards for user agents.
- If you’re a developer, document security and privacy; that reduces the argument for blocking on the basis of risk.
- If you’re a user, ask for clarity and control over how your data and credentials are used.
Final reflection
This isn’t just another fight between companies. It’s a discussion about how we want the internet to work in the era of agents acting for us. Do we prefer platforms that control and monetize every interaction, or systems that give control and time back to people? The answer will define whether the next wave of innovation truly serves people.
Original source
https://www.perplexity.ai/hub/blog/bullying-is-not-innovation