I thought this was a rather interesting article

Microsoft's list of monopolies (1990 -2007)

Microsoft was founded in 1975. Since the 1990s, Microsoft has
consistently encountered antitrust litigation in a number of countries
and regions across the world.

Actually, Microsoft has been under scrutiny before that, at least as
far back as 1987
In 1987, the Federal Trade Commission decided that Microsoft's use of
vapor-ware was a form of fraud. They cited examples as far back as
1983, and found a consistent pattern of promising features offered by
competitors and then not delivering them. This was a form of "bait
and switch". Just as the commissioners were about to vote Microsoft
offered a "settlement" and Microsoft avoided prosecution by 1 vote. I
think it was 5 to 4 against prosecuting the charges. The
commissioners had already found that laws were broken, the question
was whether Microsoft's offer to behave itself was enough to warrant
not prosecuting - a "plea bargain" so to speak.

Microsoft had also been sued for sabotage, and activities going back
as far as 1979 were cited. The cases were settled and the court
records were sealed. Victims included Tandy Radio Shack, Commodore,
Lotus, WordStar, Borland, Stack, DR-DOS, GEM, DesqView, Lattuce C,
Mark Williams C, and several others. Some estimates go as high as
over 1000 companies that have been bankrupted by Microsoft's sabotage.

Bill Gates was arrested in 1977 in Albuquerque New Mexico in 1977.
His picture was found in the police files, but all other related
information had mysteriously disappeared. Even Bill "can't remember"
the nature of the charge. What is known is that Bill's father flew
out to "work it out" with the police.

United States

In 1990, the United States Federal Trade Commission investigated the
potential conflicts that Microsoft and IBM may have within the PC
software market. The investigation was later taken over by the United
States Department of Justice.

In October 1997, the Justice Department of the United States accused
Microsoft of a monopoly in operating systems by illegally bundling
browser software with Windows operating system software sales.

In October 1998, the Microsoft monopoly case was put on trial.

In June 2000, the United States District Court declared the division
of Microsoft.

In June 2001, the Court of Appeals overturned the District Court's
decision in the browser case. Microsoft escaped the forced division;
but was found guilty of violating the anti-monopoly law.

In November 2001, Microsoft and the US Justice Department reached a
compromise. In 2002, the Federal Court agreed to the settlement.
Microsoft faced at least five years of penalties.

This summary does not include any of the civil lawsuits in which
judges ruled that Microsoft had broken the law. Microsoft has paid an
average of $2 billion per year in legal fees and settlements to
companies like IBM, Sun, Novell, Caldera, Stack, and numerous others.

In many other cases, Microsoft even avoided the settlement by having
the judge rule on technicalities. For example, claiming that evidence
of sabotage could not be used in court because it violated provisions
in copyright license agreements which forbade reverse engineering. In
some courts, judges have ruled in Microsoft's favor. In other courts,
the judge ruled that this was obstruction of justice, which usually
resulted in an immediate settlement.


In December 1998, the US's Sun Microsystems Inc. sued Microsoft
through the European Commission and launched an antitrust
investigation of Microsoft.

In March 2004, the European Commission announced that Microsoft was
abusing its position in the PC operating system market and ordered it
to adjust accordingly. The EC also issued 497 million euros in fines
to Microsoft.

In June 2005, Microsoft officially launched a Windows operating system
without its own media player.

In July 2006, the European Commission imposed another 280 million
euros in fines against Microsoft.

In March 2007, the European Commission threatened Microsoft with
another 3 million euros in fines daily.

In September 2007, the European Court of First Instances made a
decision against Microsoft's appeal to overturn the European
Commission's antitrust penalty decision.

In October 2007, Microsoft accepted the antitrust penalty decision.
The European Commission's antitrust trial against Microsoft had ended.

The text above suggests that Sun was the only one involved. I would
suspect that there were probably several companies involved, including
Sun, IBM, Novell, several European companies, Mandrake/Mandriva, SUSE
(became Novell), Acorn, makers of the ARM chip, and other hardware and
software vendors, as well as corporate customers who had been squeezed
dry and were sick of Microsoft's "upgrade or die" policies.

Microsoft's attempts to force companies and government agencies in the
EU who had been defecting to Linux to pay punitive rates for forced
upgrades and licenses they didn't need in order to avoid nullification
of licenses they did need may have also been a big factor in the EU
aggressiveness and their unwillingness to accept anything less than
total surrender.

South Korea

In April 2001, South Korean Daum Communications Inc. sued Microsoft
and its subsidiary in South Korea for unfair practices in the instant
messaging software business. In November 2005, the two companies
agreed on a settlement in which Microsoft will pay $10 million in cash
to Daum.

In November 2004, Microsoft's competitor RealNetworks accused
Microsoft of violating fair competition practices by bundling MSN
instant messenger with its Windows operating system in South Korea.
The South Korean Fair Trade Commission then expanded its scope of

In 2005, KFTC fined Microsoft $35.43 million and ordered it to remove
MSN instant messenger from its operating system. Microsoft immediately

In May 2006, KFTC rejected the appeal. Microsoft then appealed to the
High Court of South Korea.

In October 2007, Microsoft withdrew the appeal, and finally accepted
the $35.43 million fine. It also removed the MSN instant messenger
software from the Windows operating system. The Microsoft antitrust
case in South Korea came to an end.


In July 2004, Microsoft was sued by the Japanese Fair Trade
Commission. The latter alleged that part of the license agreement
signed between Microsoft and Japanese PC vendors violated the Japanese
anti-monopoly law. Microsoft was suspected of forcing PC vendors to
accept some mandatory provisions which would prevent them from suing
Microsoft. Microsoft claimed this to be a null point. It is said that
it could take several years to reach a solution to this controversy.

Justice delayed is Justice denied.