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 (Comet browser) from accessing the store.

Most reasonable people would say "their store, their rules", so that goes to mean Amazon's website, Amazon's rules.

▲

A1kmm 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Maybe a better analogy: They can ban you from going through their drive through on a bicycle, but can they sue bicycle manufacturers because bike riders are going through their drive through?

In this analogy, it seems the originating court said yes, they can sue the bicycle manufacturer (in the analogy), but on appeal the answer was no, they cannot. That seems like the appeals court got it right to me.

	▲	hatthew 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not familiar with the case, but to me it sounds like the bicycle manufacturer is encouraging people to use bikes in the drive through, maybe even providing specific tools explicitly for that purpose?

▲

hightrix 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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.

	▲	bitpush 32 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		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?