Mozilla has publicly accused Microsoft of anti-competitive practices, claiming that Windows and Copilot are deliberately designed to steer users away from Firefox and toward Edge.
The allegations echo the browser wars of the 2000s, when Microsoft was found to have illegally tied Internet Explorer to Windows. But this time, the manipulation is more sophisticated—and involves AI doing the nudging.
In a detailed blog post, Mozilla outlined what it calls "deceptive design patterns" and "dark patterns" that override user choice. The accusations are specific and damning.
Copilot, Mozilla claims, was "auto-installing" on Windows devices without user prompts or consent. A dedicated keyboard key launched Copilot by default with "no simple way to remap it." The app was automatically pinned to the taskbar.
But the browser-specific tactics are even more aggressive. The Windows Search bar is "hardcoded to only open Microsoft Edge," regardless of the user's default browser setting. Outlook and Teams "ignore your default browser selection and open links directly in Edge." And unlike competing platforms, Windows lacks "a simple prompt that other browsers can trigger" to become default.
Mozilla also notes that device migration doesn't preserve user app preferences the way Apple and Google platforms do, conveniently forcing users to reconfigure their choices—at which point Microsoft can nudge them toward Edge.
Twenty years after the antitrust battles over Internet Explorer, we're back to the same playbook—but now with AI doing the steering. Mozilla has the receipts, and regulators should pay attention.
The company cites "independent research commissioned by Mozilla" documenting these practices, though the full study isn't publicly linked. Still, the patterns Mozilla describes are familiar to anyone who's tried to use a non-Microsoft browser on Windows: the constant friction, the mysterious resets, the features that only work in Edge.
Microsoft has not yet responded to the specific allegations. But the broader question stands: when a company controls both the operating system and a competing application, how do you prevent them from tilting the playing field? We litigated this in the '90s. Apparently, we need to do it again.
