The Digital Markets Act Framework and Gatekeeper Designation
The entire strategic calculus of both technology giants has recently been reoriented around the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the EU’s landmark legislation designed to curb the power of large online platforms. For the cloud market, the potential designation of gatekeeper status for Azure and AWS is the most significant regulatory development, as it triggers a suite of mandatory behavioral obligations that directly address the issues Google previously raised.
Assessing Azure and AWS Against DMA Gatekeeper Criteria
The DMA defines a “gatekeeper” as a company operating a service that acts as an important gateway between businesses and consumers, thereby holding an entrenched and durable position in the market. Crucially, the Commission’s targeted probes are explicitly looking beyond mere revenue or user metrics to assess whether the structural role of cloud services like Azure and AWS makes them indispensable gateways for thousands of businesses relying on digital infrastructure.
If the Commission concludes in the affirmative—that these cloud services meet the functional criteria for gatekeeper status—then Microsoft and Amazon would be required to ensure compliance with a strict set of dos and don’ts specifically tailored to open up their platforms to rivals and enhance user choice. This designation would fundamentally move the regulatory focus from proving past harm in a single antitrust case to ensuring future compliance through mandated structural adjustments. This is the power of the DMA in action, and it is far broader than Google’s initial complaint could ever have achieved alone.
The Significance of Systemic Ex Ante Remedies
The true transformative power of the DMA lies in its imposition of ex-ante obligations—these are preventative rules applied to gatekeepers before any specific anti-competitive conduct occurs. This contrasts sharply with traditional antitrust enforcement, which typically addresses specific abuses only after the fact, often years after the damage is done.. Find out more about Microsoft Windows Server licensing dispute EU.
For the cloud sector, the potential remedies are nothing short of revolutionary. Gatekeeper status under the DMA would compel these providers to:
- Support interoperability between their cloud services and those of rivals.
- Facilitate **data portability** to prevent customer lock-in.
- Prohibit self-preferencing, which directly addresses the core grievance that Windows Server licensing favored Azure.
- Amazon Web Services (AWS): The clear market leader, holding an estimated 29% of the worldwide cloud infrastructure spend.
- Microsoft Azure: Commanding a significant portion, estimated at 20%.
- Google Cloud: Occupying the third position, holding approximately 13% of the spend share.. Find out more about Microsoft Windows Server licensing dispute EU tips.
- Mandated Interoperability: This means that services built on one cloud platform must be able to communicate and function effectively with services running on another, reducing dependency on a single vendor’s proprietary ecosystem. Think less walled garden, more open marketplace.
- Enhanced Data Portability: This translates to technical requirements for providing users with simple, fast, and cost-effective means to extract their operational data and migrate entire production workloads to a rival platform. This directly counters the “migration friction” cited in Google’s original filing and will be reinforced by the of the DMA.
- Audit Windows Server Spend: Categorize all Windows Server and SQL Server workloads by where they are hosted (Azure vs. non-Azure). Quantify the premium you are currently paying, if any.
- Demand Portability Clauses: For new contracts, explicitly request contractual language that caps data egress fees at cost-only pricing until the 2027 Data Act deadline takes full effect.
- Engage with CISPE Guidance: Monitor the advocacy and white papers from trade bodies like CISPE, as they often translate complex regulatory language into practical enterprise IT policy.
Such systemic remedies, if imposed, promise to reshape the competitive dynamics far more profoundly and rapidly than the outcome of a single, bilateral complaint process ever could have achieved. Furthermore, an allied piece of legislation, the, is set to directly tackle the financial side of lock-in, with provisions phasing out switching charges, including data egress fees, by January 12, 2027.
Market Dynamics in the Hyperscale Cloud Ecosystem. Find out more about Microsoft Windows Server licensing dispute EU guide.
The regulatory tug-of-war between tech giants is played out on a concrete stage defined by the current distribution of market share within the hyperscale public cloud industry in Europe. Understanding these relative positions provides crucial context for evaluating the competitive impact of the EC’s renewed focus.
The Competitive Hierarchy: Market Share Realities
The cloud market, while fiercely competitive—especially now with AI driving massive capital expenditure—is characterized by a distinct hierarchy where the top three providers command the vast majority of the market spend and infrastructure deployment across the EU. Synergy Research Group data covering the third quarter of 2025 reveals the current standing:
This distribution is vital. While Google possesses substantial scale, both Microsoft and Amazon hold significantly larger established positions. This makes any regulatory intervention that successfully levels the playing field particularly impactful for the second and third players, and crucially, for the smaller, emerging European cloud providers. Synergy data indicates that these “Big Three” collectively captured 63% of worldwide cloud infrastructure spend in Q3 2025. The competitive reality is that the gap between the dominant players and the rest of the market remains immense, underscoring why structural regulation is necessary to foster genuine platform contestability.
The Role of Trade Bodies and Independent Industry Voices
It is important to remember that the debate over Microsoft’s licensing practices was not solely driven by a direct competitor like Google. A significant body of pressure has consistently emanated from European cloud providers and various industry trade associations, such as **CISPE (Cloud Infrastructure Services Providers in Europe)**.
These smaller, often local or specialized, European cloud entities have long contended that Microsoft’s software licensing rules specifically place them at a significant disadvantage compared to the hyperscalers, distorting procurement decisions made by large public and private sector clients across the continent. CISPE previously filed an antitrust complaint in 2022, which resulted in a settlement with Microsoft that Google claimed did not adequately address its concerns, prompting Google’s independent 2024 filing. Their continuous advocacy highlights that the core issues Google raised—licensing complexity, restricted access, and vendor entanglement—are systemic barriers affecting a broader segment of the European digital infrastructure ecosystem. This persistent industry pressure validated the Commission’s decision to investigate the sector broadly under the DMA.
For enterprises looking to understand the broader context of this regulatory shift, exploring the mechanics of Digital Markets Act enforcement provides critical background to why the EC is taking such a proactive stance.
Future Regulatory Pathways and Implied Obligations
With the Commission now holding the primary agenda-setting power following Google’s withdrawal, the focus shifts from what was alleged to what will be mandated. The next eighteen months will be a crucial period where the theoretical constructs of the DMA are translated into concrete, technical obligations for the major cloud operators.. Find out more about Microsoft Windows Server licensing dispute EU strategies.
Potential Mandates for Interoperability and Portability
Should the investigations conclude that Azure and AWS behave as gatekeepers in the cloud space, the resulting obligations will force fundamental changes in service architecture. The Commission, acting under the DMA, will mandate specific behavioral changes that directly impact daily operations for IT leaders:
These mandates aim to attack vendor lock-in at the technical source code level, ensuring that competition can occur on a more level technical playing field.
Consequences of Imbalanced Contractual Term Scrutiny. Find out more about Microsoft Windows Server licensing dispute EU overview.
Another vital component of the regulatory review involves the contractual relationships between the cloud providers and their business users. The third market investigation is explicitly set to examine “potentially imbalanced contractual terms“. This opens the door for the Commission to scrutinize clauses related to liability, Service Level Agreements (SLAs), and, critically, the economics of data movement.
The regulatory trend is clear: profit-driven egress charges are a prime target. As confirmed by industry analysis following the EC’s probe announcement, the overarching **EU Data Act** is designed to eliminate these high exit fees, with a full ban on charges beyond direct cost recovery set to take effect as early as January 12, 2027. Even prior to that hard deadline, the market is already seeing precursors to change, with some providers beginning to waive specific data transfer fees—a clear anticipation of tighter regulatory oversight on the contractual aspects of multi-cloud operations. This suggests that *some* of the financial penalties Google fought against may soon become illegal under a different, but related, EU law.
Implications for Enterprise Cloud Strategy and Procurement
For the end-users—the thousands of enterprises and public bodies that depend on these vast cloud resources—the current regulatory maneuvering presents both immediate planning challenges and significant long-term opportunities for strategic flexibility. The market is entering a period of regulatory uncertainty that may ultimately yield substantial operational benefits.
Immediate Enterprise Risk Assessment and Licensing Review
In the short term, enterprises utilizing significant Microsoft workloads across multi-cloud environments are being strongly advised to reassess their current licensing exposure. The withdrawal of the private complaint combined with the ongoing, formal EU probe creates a dynamic environment where licensing terms that seemed immutable only weeks ago are now under explicit regulatory review. What looked like a fixed contractual obligation in 2024 might be the subject of a DMA non-discrimination mandate in 2026.. Find out more about Google drops Microsoft antitrust complaint significance definition guide.
IT decision-makers are urged to actively build portability considerations—the ability to switch providers without undue penalty—into all new procurement requests and Requests for Information (RFIs) issued in the immediate future. This forward-looking positioning ensures that your organization is prepared to benefit immediately from any forthcoming mandated changes in portability or cost structures.
Actionable Takeaway for IT Leaders:
The Open Door for Multi-Cloud Migration Vendors
The regulatory window created by the Commission’s inquiry presents a distinct, near-term opportunity for ancillary technology providers specializing in the migration, governance, and financial management of multi-cloud environments. Vendors offering independent migration tools, specialized FinOps platforms that track and optimize cross-cloud spending, and services designed to navigate complex hybrid network architectures are perfectly positioned to capture new business from enterprises looking to strategically position themselves ahead of potential regulatory shifts.
The impending reduction of switching friction, whether through mandated technical changes via the DMA or the cost waivers foreshadowed by the Data Act, rewards vendors who can abstract away vendor-specific complexity. This allows users to freely select and deploy services based on true merit rather than being constrained by legacy contractual or technical ties. This period is not just about compliance for the large providers; it is about strategic advantage for the surrounding ecosystem built upon the promise of an open, competitive digital infrastructure. Navigating this complex transition requires understanding the intersection of cloud governance frameworks and the practicalities of hybrid IT architecture.
Conclusion: A New Era of Cloud Scrutiny
Google’s decision to withdraw its standalone complaint against Microsoft’s Windows Server licensing practices on November 28, 2025, marks a definitive turning point. The message from Brussels is loud and clear: the era of building competitive barriers through proprietary licensing in the foundational cloud layer is facing its most significant regulatory challenge yet. By stepping back, Google effectively ceded the fight to the European Commission, which now possesses the sweeping, prescriptive tools of the DMA to investigate not just Microsoft, but AWS as well.
The original allegations—the punitive 400% markup and the billion-euro annual cost to European businesses—are now the subject of a formal, systemic regulatory inquiry expected to yield decisions within the next year. The key takeaway for every enterprise IT budget holder is this: The tectonic plates are shifting. The future of cloud multitenancy will be governed by regulatory mandates for interoperability and portability, not just vendor contracts. Your immediate strategy must pivot from managing existing lock-in to actively positioning for regulatory-mandated openness. The foundation for a more competitive cloud market in Europe is being laid right now, and enterprises must be ready to exploit the coming flexibility.
What regulatory shift in the cloud market are you currently prioritizing in your enterprise strategy? Let us know in the comments below—the conversation around fair cloud access is far from over, it has simply found a bigger platform.
