Microsoft returned to the spotlight on Thursday as it was accused of overcharging tens of thousands of British businesses that rely on Windows Server while usingMicrosoft returned to the spotlight on Thursday as it was accused of overcharging tens of thousands of British businesses that rely on Windows Server while using

Microsoft is facing allegations of unfairly raising costs for businesses using rival cloud platforms

2025/12/12 02:55

Microsoft returned to the spotlight on Thursday as it was accused of overcharging tens of thousands of British businesses that rely on Windows Server while using cloud platforms operated by Amazon, Google, and Alibaba.

The claim, worth £2.1 billion, is now before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, which has been asked to certify the case so it can move forward. The action is being driven by competition lawyer Maria Luisa Stasi on behalf of almost 60,000 firms.

Stasi’s argument is straightforward. Her argument is that Microsoft set some pricing rules that made it more expensive to run Windows Server on competing platforms other than its own Azure system. According to her, this made the market tilted in its favour, pushing businesses to carry higher costs than necessary.

Microsoft is accused of crafting cloud licensing rules harmful to competition

Stasi’s counsel, Sarah Ford, told the tribunal that the tech giant was using practices that “overcharged thousands of businesses” by making Windows Server more affordable to operate on Azure.

Ford also said that “Microsoft degrades the user experience of Windows Server” on competing clouds, which she argued was part of a coherent abuse strategy meant to establish its position.

Her remarks echoed long-standing concerns within the cloud industry. Smaller providers have complained for years that Microsoft’s licensing rules lock customers into Azure by making it more costly or less efficient to run key software elsewhere.

Even the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority has previously said that certain terms used by Microsoft have “materially disadvantaged AWS and Google”.

Microsoft rejects those claims. Its view is that the company’s structure, where it both runs Azure and licenses Windows Server to competitors, can help rather than hinder competition.

The firm says Stasi’s legal team has not offered a workable method for calculating the losses it is accused of causing and that the case should be dismissed before it goes any further.

As was previously reported by Cryptopolitan, European and UK regulators are also examining whether cloud giants, including Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, and Google Cloud, have amassed too much influence, with concerns ranging from data portability to restrictive licensing.

In July, the CMA reached a different conclusion when it released a report describing Microsoft’s cloud licensing rules as harmful to competition. The watchdog warned that these rules made it harder for customers to switch between providers or spread their workloads across different clouds.

Microsoft responded at the time by saying the analysis did not reflect the reality of a sector that has “never been so dynamic and competitive”.

Across Europe, regulators have shown rising interest in how cloud markets operate. The EU’s Digital Markets Act gives Brussels wider powers to respond if a small number of large firms become essential gateways for digital infrastructure. Officials have been considering whether the dominance of AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud meets that threshold, which would trigger new obligations for them.

These could include forcing providers to ease the movement of customer data, scale back bundling practices, or improve compatibility with other platforms.

If the tribunal allows the UK lawsuit to proceed, it could become one of the most significant challenges Microsoft has faced in the cloud era. For the businesses involved, the case is about recovering money they believe they should never have been charged.

Join a premium crypto trading community free for 30 days - normally $100/mo.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

OFAC Designates Two Iranian Finance Facilitators For Crypto Shadow Banking

OFAC Designates Two Iranian Finance Facilitators For Crypto Shadow Banking

The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned two Iranian financial facilitators for coordinating over $100 million worth of cryptocurrency in oil sales for the Iranian government, a September 16 press release shows. OFAC Sanctions Iranian Nationals According to the Tuesday press release, Iranian nationals Alireza Derakhshan and Arash Estaki Alivand “used a network of front companies in multiple foreign jurisdictions” to transfer the digital assets. OFAC alleges that Alivand and Derakhshan’s transfers also involved the sale of Iranian oil that benefited Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) and the Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL). IRGC-QF and MODAFL then used the proceeds to support regional proxy terrorist organizations and strengthen their advanced weapons systems, including ballistic missiles. U.S. officials say the move targets shadow banking in the region, where illicit financial actors use overseas money laundering and digital assets to evade sanctions. “Iranian entities rely on shadow banking networks to evade sanctions and move millions through the international financial system,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence John K. Hurley. “Under President Trump’s leadership, we will continue to disrupt these key financial streams that fund Iran’s weapons programs and malign activities in the Middle East and beyond,” he continued. Dozens Designated In Shadow Banking Scandal Both Alivand and Derakhshan have been designated “for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of the IRGC-QF.” In addition to Alivand and Derakhshan, OFAC has sanctioned more than a dozen Hong Kong and United Arab Emirates-based entities and individuals tied to the network. According to the press release, the sanctioned entities may face civil or criminal penalties imposed as a result
Share
CryptoNews2025/09/18 11:18