Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger, is facing antitrust proceedings that could limit its ability to develop AI amid a field of competitors.

First filed in 2021, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleges that Meta’s strategy of absorbing firms — rather than competing with them — violates antitrust laws. If the court rules against Meta, it could be forced to spin out its various messenger services and social media sites into independent companies.

The loss of its stable of social media companies could harm Facebook’s competitiveness not only in the social media industry but also in its ability to train and develop its proprietary Llama AI models with data from those sites.

The trial could take anywhere from a couple of months to a year, but the outcome will have lasting consequences on Meta’s standing in the AI race.

Meta’s antitrust case and its effect on AI

The FTC first opened its complaint against Meta in 2020 when the firm was still operating as Facebook. The agency’s amended complaint a year later alleges that Meta (then Facebook) used an illegal “buy-or-bury” scheme on more creative competitors after its “failed attempts to develop innovative mobile features for its network.” This resulted in a monopoly of the “friends and family” social media market.

Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg had the chance to address these allegations on April 14, the first day of the official FTC v. Meta trial. He testified that only 20% of user content on Facebook and some 10% on Instagram was generated by users’ friends. The nature of social media has changed, Zuckerberg claimed.

“People just kept on engaging with more and more stuff that wasn’t what their friends were doing,” he said — meaning that the nature of Meta’s social media holdings was sufficiently diverse.

The FTC alleges that Meta identified potential threat competitors and bought them up. Source: FTC

At the time of the FTC’s initial complaint, Meta called the allegations “revisionist history,” a claim it repeated on April 13 when it stated the agency was “ignoring reality.” The company has argued that the purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp have benefited users and that competition has appeared in the form of YouTube and TikTok. 

If the District of Columbia Circuit Court rules against Meta, the global social media giant will be forced to unwind these services into independent firms. Jasmine Enberg, vice president and principal analyst at eMarketer, told the Los Angeles Times that such a ruling could cost Meta its competitive edge in the social media market.

“Instagram really is its biggest growth driver, in the sense that it has been picking up the slack for Facebook for a long time, especially on the user front when it comes to young people,” said Enberg. “Facebook hasn’t been where the cool college kids hang out for a long time.”

Such a ruling would also affect the pool of data from which Meta can draw to train its AI models. In July 2024, Meta halted the rollout of AI models in the European Union, citing “regulatory uncertainty.” 

The pause came after privacy advocacy group None of Your Business filed complaints in 11 European countries against Meta’s use of public data from its platforms to train its AI models. The Irish Data Protection Commission subsequently ordered a pause on the practice until it could conduct a review. 

Related: Meta’s Llama 4 puts US back in lead to ‘win the AI race’ — David Sacks

On April 14, Meta got the go-ahead to use public data — i.e., posts and comments from adult users across all of its platforms — to train the model. If these firms dissolved into separate companies, with their own organizational structures and data protection policies and practices, Meta would be cut off from an ocean of data and human communication with which its AI could be improved. 

Andrew Rossow, a cyberspace attorney with Minc Law and CEO of AR Media Consulting, told Cointelegraph that in such an event, “companies would most likely control their own user data, and Meta would be restricted from using it unless new data-sharing agreements were negotiated, which would be subject to regulatory scrutiny and user/consumer privacy laws.”

However, Rossow noted that it wouldn’t be a total loss for Meta. Zuckerberg’s firm would retain the wealth of data from Facebook and Messenger. It could continue to use “opt-in” data from consumers who allow their posts to be used for AI training, and it could also employ synthetic data sets as well as third-party and open data.

Meta, the AI race and data protections

The race to unseat OpenAI and its ChatGPT model from AI dominance has grown more competitive in the last year as DeepSeek joined the fray and Meta launched the fourth iteration of its open-source Llama model. 

In addition to training new models, major AI development firms are investing billions in new data centers to accommodate new iterations. In January 2025, Meta announced the construction of a 2-gigawatt data center with more than 1.3 million Nvidia AI graphics processing units. 

Zuckerberg wrote in a post on Threads, “This will be a defining year for AI. In 2025, I expect Meta AI will be the leading assistant serving more than 1 billion people […] To power this, Meta is building a 2GW+ datacenter that is so large it would cover a significant part of Manhattan.”

Illustration of the data map coverage. Source: Mark Zuckerberg

His announcement followed the $500-billion Stargate project, which would see massive investment in AI development led by OpenAI and SoftBank, with Microsoft and Oracle as equity partners. 

Related: Trump announces $500B AI infrastructure venture ‘Stargate’

Amid this competition, AI firms are looking for broader and more varied sources of data to train their AI models — and have turned to dubious practices in order to get the data they need. In order to stay competitive with OpenAI when developing its Llama 3 model, Meta harvested thousands of pirated books from the site LibGen. According to court documents in a case pending against Meta, Llama developers harvested data from pirated books because licensing them from sources like Scribd seemed “unreasonably expensive.” 

Time was another perceived motivator for using pirated works. “They take like 4+ weeks to deliver data,” one engineer wrote about services through which they could purchase book licenses.

The practice is not limited to Meta. OpenAI has also been accused of mining data from pirated work hosted on LibGen. 

Rossow suggested that, “to ensure lasting impact — beyond short-term profit,” Meta would do well to “prioritize investment in advanced data collection, rigorous auditing and the implementation of privacy-preserving and encryption-based technologies.”

By focusing on transparency and responsible practices, “Meta can continue to genuinely advance AI capabilities, rebuild and nurture long-term user trust, and adapt to evolving legal and ethical standards, regardless of changes to its platform portfolio.”

What a ruling for the FTC would mean

Litigation is now hitting tech firms from all sides as they face allegations of privacy violations, copyright law infringement and stifling competition. Major cases like those facing Google, Amazon and Meta that have yet to play out will decide how and whether these firms can proceed as they have, defining the guardrails for AI development as well. 

Rossow said that the current antitrust case against Meta could decide how courts interpret antitrust law for tech firms, spanning tech mergers, data usage and market competition. It would also signal that courts are “willing to break up tech conglomerates” when issues of smothering competition are involved, while at the same time, “taking current precedent a step further in harmonizing it with the laws of cyberspace.”

Magazine: Memecoin degeneracy is funding groundbreaking anti-aging research

Cryptocurrency and equities markets entered a “new phase of the trade war, amid ongoing tariff escalations between the United States and China.

Global trade war concerns intensified on April 15 after the White House published a fact sheet announcing that Chinese imports would be hit with tariffs of up to 245%.

The penalties include a “125% reciprocal tariff, a 20% tariff to address the fentanyl crisis, and Section 301 tariffs on specific goods, between 7.5% and 100%,” according to the White House.

Fact sheet on tariffs, investigation into security risks posed by US reliance on imports. Source: White House

Crypto, tech stocks and other “expensive assets” have entered a “new phase” of the global trade war in response to the latest escalation, according to Aurelie Barthere, principal research analyst at crypto intelligence platform Nansen.

“We are now in a new phase of the trade war, with the focus on high-added-value sectors, Tech (and Pharma), and the zeroing in on US-China,” the analyst told Cointelegraph, adding:

“Until and IF we see a resolution of the US-China conflict (one leader picks up the phone and gives some concessions to the other), we are facing highly correlated risk assets.”

“I also think this situation is negative for non-US equities,” Barthere said. US equities and crypto have been “highly correlated” since November 2024, which increased to the downside during the current market correction, as “investors de-risk, especially expensive assets,” she added.

BTC, SPX, Nasdaq, gold chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

Related: Bitcoin’s safe-haven appeal grows during trade war uncertainty

The recovery of global equities and cryptocurrency markets hinges on the tone of global tariff negotiations, with a 70% chance to bottom by June 2025 before recovering, Nansen analysts previously predicted.

China recently appointed a new chief trade negotiator, Li Chenggang, a former assistant commerce minister during the first administration of US President Donald Trump.

Chenggang is characterized as a “very intense” negotiator experienced in dealing with US officials, Reuters reported on April 16, citing an unnamed source in Beijing’s “foreign business community.”

Related: Trump’s tariff escalation exposes ‘deeper fractures’ in global financial system

Eyes on Powell’s next move

As tariff tensions increase alongside inflation-related concerns, all eyes are now on US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s upcoming speech during the next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting on May 6.

“Markets were on edge for any signal that the Fed might delay rate cuts due to sticky inflation or heightened geopolitical risk,” analysts from Bitfinex exchange told Cointelegraph, adding that if Powell leans hawkish, risk assets like Bitcoin could see downside:

“A neutral or balanced tone may calm markets more than they already have over the past week with some signficant recoveries across many risk assets and particularly crypto where many lower market cap assets have moved 30–40% off the lows.”

“Crypto is reacting to macro news not because fundamentals have changed, but because positioning is thin and confidence is sensitive,” the analysts added.

Magazine: Bitcoin ATH sooner than expected? XRP may drop 40%, and more: Hodler’s Digest, March 23–29

Opinion by: Alexander Guseff, founder and CEO of Tectum

Crypto companies have spent years pushing digital wallets and exchange apps, convinced they’ll bring financial inclusion to the world. Here’s the reality: 1.4 billion people remain unbanked, and crypto adoption has barely exceeded 8%. For all the talk about decentralization and accessibility, the industry continues to overlook the billions of people who rely on cash for their daily lives.

In developing economies of Africa, South Asia and Latin America, cash is not just dominant — it’s essential. Banking services are sparse, smartphone penetration is low, and digital literacy remains a hurdle. Expecting these populations to onboard through a process designed for tech-savvy users with internet access is unrealistic.

Yet whenever offline crypto solutions have been tested, adoption has jumped. The message is clear: People are willing to use crypto but need a way to access it that fits their reality.

The global reality of cash dependence

Despite assumptions that digital finance will eventually replace cash, that’s not what the numbers show. Take Romania. Notably, 76% of transactions there are still cash-based, yet crypto adoption has hit 14%. In Morocco, cash remains king despite digital payment growth, yet 16% of the population has found a way to use crypto — even though it’s officially banned.

Then there’s Egypt, where approximately 72% of payments rely on cash, but crypto adoption sits at around 3%, primarily due to limited digital infrastructure. Even in India, where crypto enthusiasm runs high, 63% of transactions still happen in cash. 

Across these markets, the pattern is clear: People want to use crypto, but the industry isn’t giving them a practical way to integrate it into their everyday transactions.

Crypto’s real problem

The barriers to crypto adoption go far beyond technology. Government regulations, economic conditions and local financial habits all play a role. 

Crypto’s biggest flaw isn’t a lack of demand. It’s the assumption that digital wallets and banking apps are the only viable entry points. That thinking ignores billions of people who still operate in cash-driven economies.

A more practical approach

Instead of forcing a digital-only model onto cash-heavy regions, crypto should adapt. Blockchain-linked physical banknotes, QR-coded vouchers and SMS-based transfers could bring crypto into the real economy in a way that makes sense for people who already use cash.

Recent: Stop making crypto complex

The idea isn’t as radical as it sounds. Africa’s M-Pesa, which has over 66.2 million active users, operates on a simple agent-based model that lets people exchange cash for digital value without needing a bank account. The same approach could work for crypto, enabling users to trade blockchain-linked cash notes at local vendors.

It’s already happening in small pockets. Machankura, for example, enables Bitcoin transactions via basic mobile networks, attracting over 13,600 users in Africa. In a region where nearly all digital payments rely on simple mobile codes rather than smartphone apps, solutions like this are far more viable than pushing another exchange-based onboarding process.

Security concerns will always come up with physical assets, but trained agents and proper oversight can mitigate risks. More importantly, that’s a solvable problem — excluding billions of people from the financial system isn’t.

The digital purists get it wrong

Many in the crypto space dismiss paper-based solutions as outdated. The idea that everything must be digital ignores how financial systems evolve. People need time to transition and systems that fit their current way of life.

CoinText, an SMS-based crypto transfer service, spread to 50 countries before it shut down — not because the idea didn’t work, but because the industry wasn’t ready to support it. 

The same rigid thinking that dismissed SMS transfers is now preventing adoption in cash-heavy economies. A new service called Text BSV has emerged, enabling seamless peer-to-peer (P2P) payments of satoshis via SMS — no app downloads, registrations or prior knowledge of Bitcoin (BTC) is required. It works on any phone, even non-smartphones.

If crypto adoption remains stalled at 8%, it won’t be because people don’t want it. It’ll be because the industry insisted on an approach that doesn’t work for most of the world.

A $50-billion opportunity 

The financial upside of integrating crypto into cash economies is enormous. Similar markets could follow if Romania, with a 76% cash reliance, can reach 14% adoption. That translates into a $50-billion opportunity globally as crypto enters economies where trillions of dollars move in informal cash transactions every year.

A network of cash-to-crypto agents could generate $10 billion in revenue by 2030, mirroring the success of mobile money platforms like M-Pesa. Even crypto exchanges would benefit from tapping into these underserved markets, bridging the gap between digital and cash economies.

Regulators may hesitate at paper-based crypto owing to transparency concerns, but financial inclusion at this scale is hard to ignore. If governments see a potential $50 billion in new economic activity, they’re more likely to work toward solutions rather than block progress.

Cash meets crypto

Crypto was supposed to revolutionize financial access, but it remains out of reach for billions of people. Expecting these communities to abandon cash entirely and jump straight into digital wallets is unrealistic and a bad strategy

The solution isn’t to wait for these economies to modernize. It’s to meet people where they are. That means experimenting with cash-compatible solutions, partnering with telecom providers, and rolling out agent-based models that let people use crypto in a way that feels familiar.

The current adoption stall will become permanent if the industry doesn’t make these changes. Instead of a step backward, paper-based crypto could be the bridge that finally connects billions of people to the future of finance.

Opinion by: Alexander Guseff, founder and CEO of Tectum.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.