What are they (Microsoft) doing to do? Get the list from ISP's showing where it's customers are running Linux & one by one, go to smashing doors in?
Really, this could be seen as a threat towards Linux users, if their usershare declines in favor of Linux distros, then it becomes a question of 'who are we going to sue?'. Linux has been established to be free years ago. What's not established, is running Microsoft software on Linux (WINE, anyone?). Or the tts-microsoft-fonts installer, where the user agrees to abide by the EULA (one of the few one will ever see.
Maybe that's why Linux Mint in particular, releases an OEM Edition, free of any of these plugins, where system builders can freely install Linux Mint Cinnamon or MATE & be in compliance with the law, as long as they keep the media on hand & are only using for install purposes.
I see this as part of the reason of why Windows 10's growth is slowing, in the below article.
Yet the question remains, who do they sue? While some distros openly sits back & says to pop in & enjoy a DVD, others has it in the Software Manager as a top rated app (Ubuntu Restricted Extras), that allows one to view movies. And of course, one that they may can do little about, since they don't own Netflix, the Pipeline plugin needed (as of last year) requires WINE. Though I don't know how much WINE has an effect on this, the fact is, it runs IE natively. Though from a security standpoint, wouldn't want it on my computer, it's opening a hole for Malware to leak in.
While I don't know all of the details, it'll boil down to whom they can sue, and since no one physically 'owns' Linux (otherwise Microsoft, Apple or Android could wave enough cash in their (there goes 'whom' again) faces & just buy Linux out & shut it down in the regions where they don't want it, such as in the North American market. Some areas where poverty is high, as is piracy, they'll likely leave alone.
It's still going to boil down to whom they're going to 'sue', because Linux is guaranteed Free (libre) software. While Linux Torvalds has some input on Linux, he doesn't personally own the full & complete rights to the software, which were established before he was in the picture. Richard Stallman was already working on the project, just couldn't put it in motion.
The only thing I can possible see is that distros may be forced to take down links to any copyrighted Microsoft software. including WINE. So what if they do, the owners will come back with more that has zilch to do with Microsoft. Plus Microsoft will be going back on their word......'We Love Linux', yet it won't be the first time they've broke their word, and surely won't be the last time.
Bottom line is, they're afraid........that consumers will see & read the truth, and give a Linux distro a spin & never look back. For each lost user, there goes thousands in dollars of cash, and I speak from experience, holding upwards of $6K of activated offerings (all Full versions) & am not even counting Vista. This also doesn't include the value of ads shown on Microsoft Edge nor any of their in-store Apps, and other sites directly under the control of Microsoft.
They only 'love Linux' because they're referring to Microsoft Azure customers who runs Server versions of the OS, whom makes for upwards of 35% of their revenue for the platform, not freely available consumer editions. Microsoft could care less about Linux users who may had initially lost access their media (if provided) or recovery partition (if damaged drive) to their legit COA & refused to assist in providing a replacement, now they're complaining because these users didn't want to or couldn't pay. While there's no solid number to prove it, there has to be a certain percentage who are running Linux because there was no other option (or maybe thought there wasn't). I know what genuine reinstall media looks like for legacy machines, worked at a charity where these were used, most would accept either a Home, Pro or MCE (same for Vista/7) version with no input for a key needed, as long as the correct brand for the computer is used. There's also a way to make an AIO Windows 7 install DVD to work with all licenses, a quick Google search will show one how to do it, if an ISO of any Windows 7 is available. It's best to the correct bit version for one's computer for this trick, one wouldn't want to install a 32 bit Windows 7 on a 64 bit computer.
Of course that changed beginning with Windows 8 computers purchased with it, the COA is backed in the UEFI Firmware. Yet there's untold millions of 'legacy', (Windows 7 to XP) machines on the market in great shape & at unbelievable low pricing, as my Dell Optiplex 780 with Core 2 Quad Q9650 was only $109 shipped. Came with Home Premium, though one can input a Full version COA in the Windows Anytime Upgrade option in the Start Menu, it works just like a $100 store bought key for that purpose, just can't use on another computer while installed.
So Linux OS's are a direct threat to Microsoft's business, as I've been saying for since the release of Windows 8. Only with 10, it has more meaning, because of the lack of privacy, and it's known that Microsoft doesn't respect consumer's choices when the Custom install is chosen, not to keylog, not to serve ads, not to upload data, at least 35 known violations at the time of the release of an app designed to block these leaks. Which was months ago, the number has likely risen past 40, was originally less than 20.
Still the main question is, who are they going to sue?
Many LInux versions are free, so has no market value. Plus the rules are that another entity cannot just take over Linux (such as a merger).
The thought of this is so silly that I'm laughing my butt off.