Google Cloud raises fresh concerns over Microsoft's restrictive licensing policies, claiming they hinder fair competition, inflate costs, and pose cybersecurity risks amid ongoing regulatory scrutiny and industry shifts towards multicloud strategies.
Google Cloud has once again voiced serious concerns over Microsoft's licensing tactics when it comes to cloud services. They argue that these anti-competitive approaches still pose a significant obstacle to fair market competition and innovation worldwide. It’s been over a year since Google filed a formal complaint with the European Commission, but they continue to claim that Microsoft’s policies impose hefty financial penalties—up to a 400% markup—on organizations that use Windows Server licenses on competing cloud platforms like Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services (AWS). This so-called "vendor lock-in," as Google executives put it, essentially forces customers into Microsoft’s Azure cloud if they want to avoid paying sky-high costs.
Google points out that these practices are not just about business competitiveness—they also have broader economic implications. The UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found that even a modest 5% price increase, linked to limited competition in cloud services, costs British companies around £500 million every year. A study by the European Union echoes this, estimating that restrictive licensing policies hit local businesses with a €1 billion annual penalty. Over in the U.S., government agencies are reportedly overspending by about $750 million annually due to the lack of competition created by Microsoft’s licensing strategies.
Now, it’s not just about the economy—there’s also a serious cybersecurity angle to all this. By forcing customers to operate mainly within Microsoft’s ecosystem, it basically creates a monoculture that’s more vulnerable to widespread cyberattacks. This risk, interestingly enough, has already affected government bodies and key industries, potentially compromising service reliability and security. And with more companies deploying AI at scale using cloud platforms, the choice of provider isn't just about cost anymore—it really influences access to AI tools and features.
Despite ongoing investigations by regulatory bodies in the UK and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Microsoft doesn’t seem eager to loosen its licensing restrictions. Google Cloud officials have criticized Microsoft, branding its "exclusionary licensing" tactics as a way to cement Azure’s dominance in the market. Recently, Microsoft’s move to prevent managed service providers from hosting certain workloads on alternative clouds has only added fuel to the fire. And interestingly enough, Microsoft openly admits that driving customer migration to Azure is a key part of its growth plan—underscoring the commercial stakes involved in all of this.
While Microsoft claims to have reached settlement agreements with some European cloud providers—leading to complaints being withdrawn—Google emphasizes that these resolutions haven’t resulted in any real regulatory relief or policy shifts. Smaller European cloud firms, wary of clashing with Microsoft, tend to hold back from filing grievances. This leaves the big players, like AWS and Google Cloud, to challenge the entrenched licensing positions on their own.
In light of these ongoing clashes, Google recently announced plans to eliminate data transfer fees within the EU and UK, aiming to promote multicloud flexibility. This move aligns with the upcoming EU Data Act, which seeks to boost competition and make switching providers easier. This stands in contrast to Microsoft’s past reputation for high "cloud taxes," which Google argues hampers competition and limits what customers can choose.
Analysts and industry experts suggest that lifting Microsoft’s restrictive licensing policies could lead to huge economic benefits. They project that, by 2030, the European Union could add as much as €1.2 trillion to its GDP, and that annual savings of around €450 billion could be realized through increased market competition and better efficiency.
Google warns regulators that maintaining current policies could threaten digital transformation, security, and overall innovation. The company is calling for quick regulatory action to break down the barriers created by these licensing practices, with the goal of establishing a truly competitive cloud marketplace where customers—rather than vendors—dictate which platforms and AI capabilities are best suited for their needs.
📌 Reference Map:
- - Paragraph 1 – [1], [2], [6], [7]
- - Paragraph 2 – [1], [4], [7]
- - Paragraph 3 – [1], [6], [7]
- - Paragraph 4 – [1], [2], [6]
- - Paragraph 5 – [1], [5], [6]
- - Paragraph 6 – [1], [2], [5]
- - Paragraph 7 – [3], [1]
- - Paragraph 8 – [1], [2], [4], [7]
Source: Noah Wire Services
Verification / Sources
- https://servernews.ru/1130196 - Please view link - unable to able to access data
- https://www.techradar.com/pro/google-reminds-regulators-it-complained-about-microsofts-cloud-practices-a-year-ago-but-says-nothing-has-been-done - Google has reiterated its concerns about Microsoft's cloud licensing practices, emphasising that a formal complaint it filed with the European Commission over a year ago has seen no regulatory action. Google alleges Microsoft unfairly increases costs for customers using rival cloud platforms like Google Cloud or AWS by not allowing on-premises licenses to transfer without repurchasing—making it up to five times more expensive. While Microsoft allows these licenses to transition to its own Azure platform, competitors are disadvantaged, resulting in what Google calls "vendor lock-in." Despite findings from the UK's Competition and Markets Authority and an ongoing investigation by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, no remedies have been imposed. Google Cloud executives Marcus Jadotte and Giorgia Abeltino blame the licensing restrictions for limiting cloud market competition and harming global economic productivity. They argue that removing these restrictions could yield up to €1.2 trillion in EU GDP growth by 2030.
- https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/google-scraps-some-cloud-data-transfer-fees-eu-uk-2025-09-10/ - Google announced on Wednesday that it has eliminated data transfer fees for organisations using multiple cloud platforms in parallel within the European Union and the UK. This move comes just ahead of the implementation of the EU Data Act on Friday, which is intended to enhance competition and facilitate easier switching between cloud providers in a market currently dominated by Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud. While the Act requires cloud providers to charge fees only "at cost," Google has gone a step further by offering its "Data Transfer Essentials" service completely free of charge. Microsoft began implementing at-cost fees in August, and AWS offers reduced rates for select cases. Google's initiative is aimed at simplifying multicloud operations and improving flexibility for users. The UK's antitrust authority also supports increased competition in cloud services, recently criticising Microsoft’s licensing terms.
- https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/inside-google-cloud/filing-eu-complaint-against-microsoft-licensing - Google Cloud has filed a formal complaint with the European Commission regarding Microsoft's anti-competitive licensing practices. The complaint alleges that Microsoft's licensing terms restrict European customers from moving their current Microsoft workloads to competitors’ clouds, despite there being no technical barriers to doing so, or impose a 400% price markup. This practice has significantly harmed European companies and governments, costing them at least €1 billion a year. The restrictive licensing also stifles innovation and competition, preventing European companies from using multiple clouds, including European cloud providers. Security and reliability suffer too, as Microsoft's lock-in tactics can result in a single point of failure that harms businesses, industries, and governments. Google advocates for regulatory intervention to ensure fair competition in the cloud market and to protect consumers.
- https://apnews.com/article/045d5ac500165f1f0ac6787d67c57f92 - Google has lodged a formal complaint with the European Commission, accusing Microsoft of anti-competitive tactics in the cloud computing sector. Google's allegations assert that Microsoft's licensing practices force business customers to use its Azure cloud platform, increasing costs and security risks. Google contends that these practices stifle competition, particularly from rival services like Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services. Microsoft claims it has settled similar concerns with European cloud providers, who withdrew their complaints after reaching an agreement. The European Commission has acknowledged receipt of Google's complaint and will review it according to standard procedures. The dispute highlights ongoing tensions between major tech companies over market dominance in cloud services.
- https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/25/google-files-eu-antitrust-complaint-accusing-microsoft-of-stifling-cloud-competition.html - Google filed an antitrust complaint with the European Commission on Wednesday accusing Microsoft of using unfair licensing contracts to stifle competition in the multibillion-dollar cloud computing industry. In its complaint, Google — which ranks third globally in the cloud computing market behind market leaders Amazon Web Services and Azure — said Microsoft makes it harder for customers to move their workloads to competitors' clouds. It comes after a slew of cloud companies in July agreed a settlement with Microsoft which would see the firm make changes to address competition concerns. Microsoft's cloud 'tax' at issue. In a summary of the complaint, Google — which is not a CISPE member — said that Microsoft "harms cybersecurity and undermines innovation." According to Google, if a company runs Microsoft's Office suite of productivity tools and other applications on Google Cloud Platform or other competing clouds, they are effectively required to pay a "tax" in the form of punchy licensing fees to Microsoft. Google said Microsoft undermined competition in cloud, and referred to findings of a U.K. Competition and Markets Authority study which determined Microsoft acquired 60% to 70% of all new British cloud customers in 2021 and 2022. Google also suggested that Microsoft's cloud practices have potentially made businesses more prone to security issues.
- https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/inside-google-cloud/global-harms-restrictive-cloud-licensing-one-year-later - Microsoft still imposes a 400% price markup on customers who choose to move legacy workloads to competitors’ clouds. This penalty forces customers onto Azure by making it more expensive to use a competitor. A mere 5% increase in cloud pricing due to lack of competition costs U.K. cloud customers £500 million annually, according to the CMA. A separate study in the EU found restrictive licensing amounted to a billion-Euro tax on businesses. In the United States, the lack of competition due to Microsoft’s licensing tactics amounts to $750 million in overspending by government agencies every year. Cybersecurity and reliability also suffer, as Microsoft drives customers into an insecure monoculture that becomes a single point of failure. Attacks on Microsoft’s insecure software have spread across governments and critical industries. With AI technologies disrupting the business market in dramatic ways, ending Microsoft’s anti-competitive licensing is more important than ever as customers move to the cloud to access AI at scale. Customers, not Microsoft, should decide what cloud — and therefore what AI tools — work best for their business.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We've since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score: 8
Notes: The narrative highlights Google's ongoing concerns over Microsoft's licensing practices, referencing a formal complaint filed with the European Commission over a year ago. The most recent publication date of similar content is 6 days ago, indicating the topic's continued relevance. (techradar.com) The report includes updated data, such as the UK's Competition and Markets Authority's findings on the economic impact of Microsoft's practices, suggesting a higher freshness score.
Quotes check
Score: 7
Notes: The report includes direct quotes from Google Cloud executives, such as Marcus Jadotte and Giorgia Abeltino, regarding Microsoft's licensing practices. These quotes appear in earlier material, indicating potential reuse. (techradar.com) However, no online matches were found for some specific phrases, suggesting potential originality.
Source reliability
Score: 6
Notes: The narrative originates from ServerNews, a source with limited verifiability and a single-outlet narrative. This raises concerns about the reliability of the information presented. The report includes references to other reputable sources, such as Reuters and AP News, which strengthens its credibility. (reuters.com)
Plausability check
Score: 8
Notes: The claims regarding Microsoft's licensing practices and their impact on competition and innovation are plausible and align with previous reports. The narrative includes specific data points, such as the UK's Competition and Markets Authority's findings on the economic impact of Microsoft's practices, which supports its credibility. The tone and language used are consistent with typical corporate communications, suggesting authenticity.
Overall assessment
Veredict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary: The narrative addresses ongoing concerns over Microsoft's licensing practices, referencing a formal complaint filed with the European Commission over a year ago. While the topic remains relevant, the source's limited verifiability and the reuse of quotes from earlier material raise questions about the originality and reliability of the content. The inclusion of updated data and references to reputable sources partially mitigates these concerns. Further verification from more authoritative sources is recommended to fully assess the credibility of the claims.