Exactly two years ago, Pavel Durov found himself at the center of an unprecedented legal conflict. French authorities brought charges against the Telegram founder that call into question the very principles of decentralized platforms. And now, 24 months later, the picture is far more complex and contradictory than it initially seemed.
The beginning of this story was August 2024, when Durov was detained in Paris for three days. This is the maximum period that French law allows a person to be held without formal charges being filed. In essence, for the first time in modern practice, the head of a major technology platform was sought to be held accountable for actions committed by users. This created a dangerous precedent that could have paralyzed the development of the entire industry.
The prosecution's weakening position
However, now, as I see from analyzing the situation, the prosecution is falling apart at the seams. By November 2025, the travel ban that forced Durov to regularly check in with police had been lifted. But the investigation itself is not closed: prosecutors are still examining whether Telegram facilitated crimes and whether it cooperated actively enough with law enforcement.
The defense's key argument is the accumulated data. Durov insists: two years of observation have shown that Telegram's moderation and cooperation are on par with, and possibly superior to, the indicators of its competitors. The messenger's official security page states that 23.6 million groups and channels were blocked over the year. Of these, 370,777 were related to child exploitation, and 164,099 to terrorist content. These are not just numbers for show; this is real work.
Double standards and political undertones
Particular attention is drawn to Durov's statement that officials from various countries unofficially asked him for political favors—from publication bans to surveillance. Refusal, he says, triggers campaigns through local media and human rights organizations. He previously cited similar examples in Romania and Moldova.
The contrast with other giants is also telling. This week, the Tech Transparency Project found more than 50 paid advertisements in Meta's ad library (recognized as extremist in Russia) containing AI-generated child exploitation content. And where are the high-profile investigations? Why are one set of standards applied to some platforms and completely different ones to others?
What's next?
Within France itself, protest is growing against President Macron's initiatives to regulate online platforms. In August, the country's Constitutional Council struck down the ban on social media use by children under 15, citing freedom of expression. This is a serious signal: even in France, they understand that excessive pressure on platforms could violate fundamental rights.
Durov also points to similar pressure in Russia, where a case was opened against him in July on terrorism-related charges.
In the coming months, it will become clear whether French prosecutors will decide to take the case to court or prefer to quietly close it. But regardless of the outcome, this case has already changed the rules of the game.
My expert assessment: the market is closely watching this case, and the volatility of the Gram token (formerly Toncoin), which traded around $1.47 on Monday, down 3% in a day, is just the tip of the iceberg. If the charges are dropped, it will be a powerful signal for the entire industry: decentralized platforms cannot be forced into total censorship under the threat of criminal prosecution of their founders. This will strengthen trust in the crypto ecosystem as a whole, but if the court sides with the prosecution, a wave of repression against developers around the world awaits us.