What's REALLY behind the Amazon vs. Perplexity battle.

Let's pump the brakes on the idea that "AI agents will do everything for everyone."

I've said it before: we're nowhere near ready for that world.
And the latest dispute between 𝗔𝗺𝗮𝘇𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁𝘆 is a perfect example of why.

At its core, this fight is about control. Who gets to decide how AI interacts with digital platforms, and whose interests take priority when it does.

Here's what's happening, in simple terms:

💡 Amazon sent a cease-and-desist letter to Perplexity, demanding that it stop allowing its AI browser assistant (called Comet) to make purchases on Amazon for users. Amazon says the tool violates its terms of service because it doesn't clearly disclose that an AI, not a person, is making the purchase. The company argues that this leads to a "degraded" shopping experience.

💡 Perplexity, on the other hand, says Amazon's real motivation is to protect its ad revenue and upselling model. They claim Amazon is prioritizing its own business interests over user convenience and choice.

In other words, 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹.

Amazon says it's protecting the customer experience.
Perplexity says it's protecting user freedom.
Both are probably a little right, and a little self-interested.

To me, this is just the beginning.

AI agents are incredibly useful, but as we deploy them to do more, we'll need to answer some messy questions.

What happens to 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹𝘀, 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴-𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 when AI starts doing the clicking and buying for us?

Who owns that data? Who gets the revenue? Who's accountable when something goes wrong?

Agentic AI isn't just a technical leap. It's an economic and ethical one.
And every major platform is about to face the same question Amazon is wrestling with now:

How much control are you willing to give up when the user isn't the one doing the work anymore?

Let me know in the comments! 👇🏽👇🏽👇🏽