In Law360, Attorneys Examine What Amazon v. Perplexity Decision Means for Agentic AI and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

In a Law360 article, attorneys examined what the Amazon v. Perplexity decision means for agentic AI and the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The decision addresses a question of first impression: whether an AI agent that assists a user in navigating a website constitutes unauthorized access under the CFAA. The court held that, on the facts presented, it does not, because it is the user, not the AI tool, who accesses the website for purposes of the statute.

The authors note that the decision underscores that system architecture, specifically whether the user’s device or the AI itself communicates with third-party servers, may be a critical factor in determining CFAA exposure. Under this interpretation, the statute offers limited protection against unwanted agentic AI interactions, leaving businesses to rely primarily on contractual terms and technical safeguards. The article summarizes the practical implications of the decision for AI developers and deployers, as well as for businesses whose platforms or data may be implicated by AI-driven interactions.

The article was authored by partner Regina Sam Penti, co-lead of the firm’s artificial intelligence industry group, and IP transactions associates Sabrina Kim and Chloe Meyers.