Unverified50% confidenceEventExact time
The district court issued a preliminary injunction in March 2026, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the injunction in August on the grounds that it was the user, not Perplexity, who accessed Amazon's systems, and made clear that the ruling does not constitute a general legal principle regarding AI Agents.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/19/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedOn September 21, 2026, Amazon blocked Muse's access to its website on the grounds that unauthorized agent access violated its terms of use.76% similarUnverifiedAmazon's Terms of Use explicitly prohibit the use of bots, crawlers, or other automated tools to access its services, and violators may face account bans.71% similarUnverifiedThe acquisition deal between iRobot and Amazon was previously blocked by regulators.67% similarUnverifiedIn the privacy lawsuit against Otter.AI, the federal court allowed claims under the federal wiretap law and California CIPA Section 631 to proceed, with the plaintiffs arguing that Otter's terms of service cannot satisfy all-party consent state requirements; this is a ruling on a motion to dismiss, not a finding of liability.66% similarUnverifiedAmazon's strategy of blocking competing AI agents is similar to Google's practice of prioritizing its own products, and carries potential antitrust regulatory risk.64% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1069812API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1069812MCP
get_claim(id=1069812)