Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

law.justia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 195 posts

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#171

Post by bitpush »

hightrix wrote: post #121
bitpush wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to make sense of this and the best analogy I can find is using an example of physical products. 1. I can walk into Apple Store and buy Apple device (this is similar to me opening the browser and accessing amazon.com 2. If I'm busy, I can hire a person to go stand in line and buy the device (me asking Comet to shop on my behalf) The core question is does Apple (Amazon in this case) can block the hired help…

3. You can walk into an Apple store and buy a phone without looking at their PCs, tablets, wall of accessories, etc. Apple cannot force you to look at everything else in their store. Similarly, Amazon cannot force you to render the content they deliver to you. They can absolutely control access to their content, but they cannot control if you actually see the content they are delivering to you.

What if you had to sit through a presentation of their cool products before you can see the product?

Or imagine, showing you short movie clips (call it trailers) before they show you the movie you paid to watch?

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#173

Post by ndriscoll »

cobbzilla wrote: post #170
gruez wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run adblock in the browser to block those too. Most don't bother, just like they won't bother to have a custom AGENTS.md to block all these offers.

No, I mean the dd server can deny completion of the transaction unless the client has provably seen the offer content. All the DRM standards are in place, this isn’t anonymous browsing, it’s easily controlled if they want to. They could also make it such that any client caught sidestepping is hit with a DMCA violation. you need to expand your creative imagination around the limits of enshittification, there are reall…

As long as the client supports external display/input (e.g. USB-C with DP alt mode) you could always attach a KVM and run a proxy with vision capabilities to filter.

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#174

Post by cobbzilla »

ndriscoll wrote: post #173
cobbzilla wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I mean the dd server can deny completion of the transaction unless the client has provably seen the offer content. All the DRM standards are in place, this isn’t anonymous browsing, it’s easily controlled if they want to. They could also make it such that any client caught sidestepping is hit with a DMCA violation. you need to expand your creative imagination around the limits of enshittification, there are reall…

As long as the client supports external display/input (e.g. USB-C with DP alt mode) you could always attach a KVM and run a proxy with vision capabilities to filter.

for the company/account placing DD orders via CLI, instant ban hammer.

you don’t seem to understand, sure clients can block ads. servers can also refuse to proceed unless a provable step is taken, and that’s linked to your DD integration. Bad actors can easily been detected

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#175

Post by shermantanktop »

Zambyte wrote: post #27
algoth1 wrote: post #9

TLDR: Perplexity agents allegedly ignored Amazon's robots.txt

robots.txt is a suggestion, not a rule. It's a service to crawlers to help them avoid wasting time. Using robots.txt as a security measure is like trying to stop a foreign invader with a "road closed" sign. Edit: this is obviously assuming they literally meant robots.txt, but from a qyick skim of the site, it doesn't look like that was mentioned at least. I guess you meant it metaphorically :P

> robots.txt is a service to crawlers to help them avoid wasting time

I doubt anyone edits robots.txt with a warm fuzzy feeling about how much they are helping crawlers be efficient.

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#176

Post by ndriscoll »

cobbzilla wrote: post #174
ndriscoll wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as the client supports external display/input (e.g. USB-C with DP alt mode) you could always attach a KVM and run a proxy with vision capabilities to filter.

for the company/account placing DD orders via CLI, instant ban hammer. you don’t seem to understand, sure clients can block ads. servers can also refuse to proceed unless a provable step is taken, and that’s linked to your DD integration. Bad actors can easily been detected

I'm saying the client can take the action, but the user never sees the client because they interact with it through e.g. their AdBuster box, a glorified PiKVM that interacts with client, OCRs it, and produces simple filtered HTML for the user.

As long as you can attach a display and USB inputs, your "monitor" or "braille device" can go straight to a vision model, which can then send inputs from your "keyboard". There are already off the shelf devices that can do this if you install an agent harness.

Like an ad blocking DVR for the 2020s.

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#177

Post by [deleted] »

petilon wrote: post #145
gz5 wrote: post #16

Can't comment on the legal basis in the eyes of CFAA or DAFA, but from a business perspective AI is a legit threat to Amazon because headless Amazon makes it more difficult for Amazon to sell ads, which is a large part of their revenue. Meaning, even if merchants would have a difficult time moving from Amazon to an AI native version of Amazon, this is still a threat.

> AI is a legit threat to Amazon because headless Amazon makes it more difficult for Amazon to sell ads No, the threat is bigger than that. If AI automatically places orders on Amazon's site, tomorrow it could place the order on another company's site, and the user won't know the difference. You have to own the consumer experience. If AI owns the consumer experience, the underlying SaaS (or e-commerce website) become…

[deleted]

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#178

Post by cobbzilla »

ndriscoll wrote: post #176
cobbzilla wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for the company/account placing DD orders via CLI, instant ban hammer. you don’t seem to understand, sure clients can block ads. servers can also refuse to proceed unless a provable step is taken, and that’s linked to your DD integration. Bad actors can easily been detected

I'm saying the client can take the action, but the user never sees the client because they interact with it through e.g. their AdBuster box, a glorified PiKVM that interacts with client, OCRs it, and produces simple filtered HTML for the user. As long as you can attach a display and USB inputs, your "monitor" or "braille device" can go straight to a vision model, which can then send inputs from your "keyboard". There…

Whose DD API key is being used? This is not an anonymous access scenario. The DD API client is tied to some company, the behavior is detectable, they are banned.

Or do you give out KVMs to all your customers and say “place your DD orders with us this way”?

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#179

Post by jatora »

theturtletalks wrote: post #96

People don’t realize how big of a threat LLMs are to marketplaces like Amazon, because down the line people will just be talking to AI agents to help them find products, check out, do all of these things. So you’re probably like, why can’t I just use ChatGPT to do that? And you can, but ChatGPT is trying to become the new Amazon. They are trying to vet stores that can check out through ChatGPT officially, and so you’…

The new era of ads is this comment right here.

shudders

Re: Amazon vs. Perplexity – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

#180

Post by mirthflat83 »

jatora wrote: post #179
theturtletalks wrote: post #96

People don’t realize how big of a threat LLMs are to marketplaces like Amazon, because down the line people will just be talking to AI agents to help them find products, check out, do all of these things. So you’re probably like, why can’t I just use ChatGPT to do that? And you can, but ChatGPT is trying to become the new Amazon. They are trying to vet stores that can check out through ChatGPT officially, and so you’…

The new era of ads is this comment right here. shudders

I legitimately thought the parent comment was satire
Post reply on HN