Meta has made a stunning $14.8 billion investment for a 49% non-voting stake in Scale AI, a crucial player in the artificial intelligence supply chain. The deal, which includes hiring Scale AI’s 28-year-old founder and CEO, Alexandr Wang, is raising alarms over how Big Tech is expanding its AI dominance through deals that cleverly sidestep automatic regulatory review.
Alexandr Wang, Founder and CEO of Scale AI
Source: Ian Tuttle for Delivered
Because Meta acquired a non-controlling, non-voting share, the investment did not trigger an automatic antitrust review. However, the structure is drawing attention from experts and lawmakers. Scale AI's business involves using human contractors to label data that trains AI models - a service it provides to some of Meta's biggest rivals, including Microsoft and OpenAI.
This raises immediate conflict-of-interest concerns. As part of the deal, Wang will join Meta while remaining on Scale's board, though sources say his access to company data will be limited.
The competitive ripples have already begun. Shortly after the announcement, Google reportedly cut its ties as a customer of Scale AI, and other clients are said to be re-evaluating their contracts.
A spokesperson for Scale AI stated the company remains committed to protecting customer data but did not comment on Google's reported decision. The situation highlights the fear among tech companies of becoming dependent on a service that is now heavily tied to a major competitor.
This "acquihire"-style deal puts regulators in a difficult position. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has already been investigating similar Big Tech partnerships, including:
Microsoft's $650 million deal to license models from and hire most of the staff of Inflection AI.
Amazon's hiring of key talent from the AI firm Adept.
The Department of Justice is also reportedly reviewing Google's partnership with Character.AI.
Legal experts note that Meta's non-voting stake provides "a lot of protection" from legal challenges. However, critics like Senator Elizabeth Warren argue that if a deal stifles competition, regulators have a duty to intervene, regardless of what the companies "call this deal."
Meta's investment is not an isolated event. It represents a broader industry trend where tech giants use massive investments and talent acquisitions to secure access to critical AI resources without the headache of a full merger review. As these partnerships multiply, the central question for regulators remains: where is the line between a legitimate business deal and a calculated move to dominate the future of technology?
