You know, I was really ready to dismiss it for the same reasons many of the other posters have- Microsoft? Complaining about someone else's monopoly? Filing an anti-trust suit? Yeah, it sounds like a joke.
But, reading over the article- Microsoft kind of has a point.
When MS was getting its own rear end handed to it in court, it was largely over bundling its browser with its ubiquitous operating system. Since then, there's been a massive expansion of the browser market, and a lot more consumer choices. Heck, I have three web browsers installed on my computer right now, not counting the ones on my consoles.
When you move forward to today, the market has changed considerably. Yes, MS is still the OS king, but an increasing number of people are accessing the Web with smartphones instead, and one of the major web browsers people are using comes from the Web's reigning king, Google.
Now, yes, Google is a great search engine. I even like a lot of what Chrome has to offer. That doesn't mean I feel they should have a right to lock other competitors out of their services, or that I trust them so wholeheartedly that I don't think they should have any competition in their (expanding!) markets. I wouldn't be okay with it if it was some smaller company being shut out of accessing YouTube; why should that stance waver just because the aggrieved party is the big "M"?