The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has launched investigations into Amazon.com and Alphabet’s Google to determine whether the tech giants misled advertisers about the terms and pricing of ads placed on their platforms, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters on Friday.

The probes, led by the FTC’s consumer protection unit, center on whether the companies properly disclosed how their ad auctions work and the costs advertisers ultimately face.

At the heart of the FTC’s inquiry into Amazon is its use of advertising auctions, where businesses bid to have their products prominently displayed in search results and recommendation feeds. Regulators are specifically examining whether Amazon adequately disclosed its use of “reserve pricing” — a mechanism setting the minimum price advertisers must meet before winning ad placement.

Such practices, if not transparently communicated, could leave advertisers at a disadvantage, bidding against thresholds they were never made fully aware of.

Google, which dominates the global online ad market, is facing similar scrutiny. According to the source, the FTC is looking into the company’s internal pricing processes to assess whether it raised ad costs in ways that were not clearly disclosed to advertisers.

Meta’s parallel struggles

The FTC’s focus on Amazon and Google mirrors concerns raised in recent years over Meta’s ad business, which remains the second-largest in the world behind Google. Advertisers have long complained that Meta’s platforms — Facebook and Instagram — also operate with opaque pricing models, particularly in how costs are determined during bidding wars for placement in news feeds or Stories.

In 2020, reports surfaced that Meta failed to fully disclose certain limits in its ad metrics, leading to lawsuits from advertisers who argued they had been misled about reach and engagement. Although the company settled some of those disputes, the cases underscored how the entire digital ad ecosystem has been criticized for its lack of transparency.

Analysts say the new FTC probes suggest regulators are now broadening their lens beyond individual cases and targeting structural practices across the industry.

A broader backdrop of ad-tech dominance

The investigations mark the latest regulatory challenge for two companies that together account for the bulk of global digital ad spending. Both Amazon and Google have built multibillion-dollar businesses on digital advertising, with Amazon rapidly rising as the third-largest U.S. ad player behind Google and Meta.

Globally, Google remains the leader, generating more than $200 billion annually from search and YouTube ads. Amazon’s ad business, though smaller, has been growing faster, topping $46 billion in revenue in 2023.

Critics have long accused the companies of using opaque pricing models that leave advertisers guessing how much of their spending is actually going toward winning bids versus platform-controlled margins.

The FTC’s move echoes regulatory probes in Europe, where authorities have repeatedly pressed Google over its dominance in online ads and the lack of transparency in its auction systems. In 2021, French regulators fined Google €220 million for abusing its market position in ad-tech.

Amazon, meanwhile, has faced scrutiny over whether its retail platform gives preference to its own products and services in search and ad rankings — issues that overlap with how it structures advertising slots.

While the current FTC inquiries are preliminary, analysts say they highlight the agency’s growing focus on ad-tech practices as a core part of its consumer protection mandate.

If regulators determine that Amazon or Google misled advertisers, the companies could face fines or be forced to overhaul how they disclose ad pricing and auction mechanisms. That could ripple across the digital advertising industry, where pricing opacity has long been a source of frustration for small and mid-sized businesses trying to compete with larger advertisers.

The investigations, for now, put two of Silicon Valley’s most powerful companies under fresh scrutiny — at a time when their dominance in the ad business is already being challenged by rising competitors such as TikTok and retail media networks.

Perplexity, the AI web search startup positioning itself as a challenger to Google, has been pulled deeper into the legal storm surrounding artificial intelligence and intellectual property.

On September 10, Encyclopedia Britannica and its subsidiary Merriam-Webster filed a lawsuit in New York federal court accusing the company of copyright and trademark infringement, marking another high-profile case in the escalating clash between traditional publishers and AI platforms.

According to the complaint, Britannica claims that Perplexity’s “answer engine” systematically scrapes its websites, siphons away internet traffic, and reproduces copyrighted definitions and entries without authorization. The companies also accuse Perplexity of trademark misuse, alleging that their names are sometimes attached to hallucinated or incomplete content that could erode brand credibility.

The lawsuit highlights Perplexity’s definition of the word plagiarize as appearing identical to Merriam-Webster’s entry — a case in point, the publishers say, of outright copying.

Perplexity has long faced accusations of operating as a “bullshit machine” that reproduces original material without proper citations. The company is also accused of “stealth crawling,” a practice in which bots bypass website crawler blockers — a tactic some publishers say has become common across the AI sector.

The case is the latest in a string of legal challenges for Perplexity, which counts Amazon founder Jeff Bezos among its investors. It has already clashed with Forbes, The New York Times, and the BBC. News Corp, the parent company of The Wall Street Journal and New York Post, sued Perplexity in October 2024, alleging that the startup “masquerades theft as innovation.”

Yet not all publishers have taken an adversarial approach. Perplexity has rolled out an ad revenue sharing program that attracted Time magazine and the Los Angeles Times. In another sign of cooperation, the World History Encyclopedia joined the initiative and, on September 8, launched a Perplexity-powered AI chatbot to help users sift through its academic database.

How Perplexity’s Case Stacks Up

Perplexity’s legal battles are part of a broader wave of disputes between AI firms and content creators.

OpenAI, perhaps the most visible player, has faced lawsuits from The New York Times, book authors, and media groups alleging copyright violations. While some cases remain unresolved, OpenAI has sought to blunt criticism by signing licensing agreements with publishers like the Associated Press, Axel Springer, and People, Inc. — a strategy that offers a blueprint for industry-wide coexistence.

Anthropic, another major AI firm, recently agreed to a $1.5 billion settlement with book publishers. Analysts note that Anthropic’s decision to pay was less about conceding wrongdoing and more about preserving a favorable copyright ruling that recognized AI-generated outputs as derivative works, potentially shielded under fair use.

Compared with those giants, Perplexity’s exposure may be riskier. Unlike OpenAI and Anthropic, it lacks the same scale of partnerships or financial war chest, leaving it more vulnerable if courts rule against it. With multiple lawsuits pending, the startup’s reputation as an “answer engine” that shortcuts traditional search could either accelerate its growth — if settlements normalize licensing fees — or leave it buried under litigation costs.

What’s at Stake?

For Britannica and Merriam-Webster, the case is about more than lost clicks; it’s about the integrity of their brands in an era where AI can blur authorship. For Perplexity, it is a test of survival.

If the courts side with Britannica, it could force the company to abandon scraping practices and negotiate expensive licensing deals — a move that would strain a young firm still dependent on investor backing. If Perplexity secures a favorable outcome, however, it could embolden other AI challengers to expand aggressively without seeking publisher approval.

The lawsuit thus feeds into a larger question hanging over the industry: will AI companies and publishers resolve their tensions through the courts, through billion-dollar settlements, or through a new licensing ecosystem that forces reluctant actors into deals?

Let me begin by thanking our LOC who coordinated the physical graduation event of Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 17 in Lagos. Thank you Chigozie Egbon, Promise Oriabure, Segla Nayon Segla and Michael Balogun. I also thank our program manager, arguably the most competent operator in Nigeria today, Eyitayo Adeleke for his peerless execution on things.

In the modern digital landscape, where the majority of learning and networking occurs on a screen, the physical gathering can seem like an anachronism. However, the Tekedia Physical Graduation Event in Lagos stands as a powerful testament to the enduring significance of community, the reinforcement of shared purpose, and the critical need for a physical anchor in a world of digital fluidity. It is more than a ceremony; it is a symbolic moment in the evolution of African entrepreneurial capitalism. This convergence of co-learners, faculty, and industry leaders in Nigeria’s commercial hub represents a new tectonic shift, transforming theoretical knowledge into a tangible force ready to reshape the market ecosystem.

Tekedia Institute, with its digital-first model, has democratized access to world-class business education. The learners who participated in this program, having mastered the mechanics of market systems and the fundamental constructs of business management, come from a diverse pool of sectors and geographies. They are the new architects of African wealth, ready to fix market frictions and accelerate human welfare. While the digital classroom is the vehicle for knowledge transfer, the physical graduation is the moment of confirmation, where these intellectual assets are formally integrated into the national and continental economic fabric. It is here that the handshakes are real, the conversations are unfiltered, and the bonds of a shared intellectual journey are solidified.

The Lagos graduation ceremony is a clear signal that the value of knowledge is not confined to the virtual realm. It is a declaration that the ideas and strategies formulated over months of intensive learning are now ready for real-world deployment. These graduates, equipped with the tools of entrepreneurial execution—from fundraising to product strategy—are now prepared to build the next generation of category-king companies. The event serves as a critical networking platform, a space where the next great partnerships are formed, and where mentorship transcends the virtual class board. It is the moment the network effect of the Tekedia Institute is made manifest.

Today’s Tekedia Physical Graduation Event is a celebratory ritual and a strategic imperative, cementing the foundation for a new corps of leaders. These are the individuals who will drive innovation, create jobs, and build the future of our collective prosperity. They are now officially #ready2lead.

Good People, the knowledge of a people is the wealth of a people, and Africa’s future will be built. Enjoy the ceremony.