> Fundamentally, Google’s argument is that it should not have to pay Microsoft when it builds and offers cloud services using our intellectual property – namely Windows Server – if customers have otherwise purchased the same software for a very different use, i.e., on their own server.

Wait, hang on, astroturfing aside, I think I'm on Google's side here. If I bought a Windows server license, and I want to use that license on a server in GCP/Azure/AWS, why should I have to buy another one?