FOLLOW US

By Samuel López | USA Herald

SAN FRANCISCO - Amazon's decision to block Meta's Muse from shopping on Amazon.com exposes a legal problem that will become much bigger as AI agents begin acting for millions of consumers.

Amazon reportedly began blocking Muse on September 20, displaying a message that continued access by an unauthorized AI agent violated Amazon's Conditions of Use. Amazon said Meta had not obtained authorization and that Muse did not properly identify itself.

Amazon's rules are more specific than the warning suggests.

Amazon updated its Conditions of Use in May 2025 with dedicated Agent Terms. They define an agent as software taking autonomous or semi-autonomous action for someone and state that an agent must identify itself when accessing Amazon. The rules also prohibit agents from concealing themselves, circumventing CAPTCHAs or avoiding measures designed to block agent access. Amazon's terms expressly allow the company to limit agent access using technical measures.

Read Amazon's Conditions of Use

Amazon has reinforced that position elsewhere. Its 2026 Business Solutions Agreement states that agents must “clearly identify themselves as automated systems” and are prohibited from accessing Amazon Services after Amazon requests that access stop. Amazon also reserves discretion to technically restrict them.

Read Amazon's Business Solutions Agreement provisions

But here is the legal question consumers should watch: Your permission is not necessarily the only permission an AI agent needs.

You can authorize Muse to buy something for you. That establishes permission between you and Muse. It does not automatically erase Amazon's contractual rights over its systems.

Yet Amazon's control is not unlimited.

The Ninth Circuit confronted almost this exact issue in Amazon.com Services LLC v. Perplexity AI Inc. On August 4, 2026, the court vacated a preliminary injunction against Perplexity's Comet agent. The court concluded Amazon was unlikely, on the record before it, to prove that Perplexity itself accessed Amazon computers under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Instead, the court characterized the Amazon customer as accessing Amazon with help from an AI tool.

That distinction could become enormously important.

There is also a disability-access issue Amazon and other retailers may eventually confront. Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires covered businesses to make reasonable modifications to policies when necessary for customers with disabilities and to provide appropriate auxiliary aids where necessary for effective communication. DOJ expressly says these obligations extend to goods and services offered online.

That does not mean a disabled customer automatically has a legal right to use Muse specifically. Amazon could argue that other accessible methods provide equal access or that unrestricted third-party agent access creates legitimate security, privacy or operational problems.

But imagine a person who cannot physically navigate a complicated checkout process and uses an AI agent as an assistive tool. A categorical policy blocking that technology—without considering an accommodation—could generate a much different ADA case than one involving a nondisabled shopper merely using AI for convenience.

And that brings us to the federal E-SIGN Act, which expressly defines an “electronic agent” as a computer program capable of independently initiating actions or responding to electronic records. State versions of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act go further: contracts may be formed through electronic agents even when no human reviewed the agent's individual actions at the moment they occurred.

As AI moves from answering questions to signing up for services, negotiating bills and spending people's money, that may become one of the next major questions in agency and contract law.

“If consumers can legally authorize another person to act on their behalf, the law will eventually have to confront when—and under what safeguards—they can authorize an AI agent to do the same.” — Samuel López | USA Herald

Want reporting that goes beyond the headline? Subscribe to the USA Herald newsletter for investigative reporting, legal analysis, emerging AI issues and stories that deserve a closer examination.

Follow USA Herald on X at @RealUSAHerald.