What is actually known
The reported facts are narrow, and it is worth being exact about them.
- The Belgian Competition Authority (BCA) has received complaints. That is all that has been reported.
- The complaints allege that Copilot is bundled "across" Microsoft's wider productivity platform.
- The source is the authority's investigative-unit head, as relayed by GCR reporter Rashid Baxter.
The public text of the report does not say:
- who complained
- which Copilot products or subscriptions are involved
- when the complaints were filed
- which legal basis is invoked
- whether a formal investigation exists
- how Microsoft has responded
A complaint is not a probe, a statement of objections, or a finding of wrongdoing. Treat any headline that implies otherwise with suspicion.
Why "bundling" needs product-level precision
"Copilot" now covers several things, and any bundling argument depends on which one is meant. Microsoft's own licensing documentation shows the layers:
- Copilot Chat is described as an AI prompt-and-response experience that is automatically included for organizations with an eligible Microsoft 365 subscription. The web-based chat comes at no extra cost.
- Work-based chat, which shows results the user's Entra work or school account can access, is available with a Microsoft Copilot license.
- The Copilot license is sold as an add-on to qualifying plans such as Business Standard, Business Premium, E3 and E5.
Microsoft's business pricing page also lists plans that include Copilot, such as Microsoft 365 Business Standard with Copilot and Business Premium with Copilot. It sells Microsoft 365 Copilot Business as an add-on to an existing plan. Prices on that page are US figures, so they say nothing about what Belgian customers pay.
I can't tell from the report which of these arrangements the complainants object to. It might be the free chat layer, the combined "with Copilot" plans, or the in-app integration. Anyone claiming to know is guessing.
The Belgian regulatory angle
The BCA has had specific powers to help apply the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA) since May 2024. Its DMA page lists Microsoft as a designated gatekeeper for Windows and LinkedIn.
The Commission alone designates gatekeepers and decides on DMA non-compliance. National authorities like the BCA can help by receiving complaints and investigating, and they then pass results to Brussels. The BCA must also tell the Commission about any national-law investigation against a gatekeeper, or any measure it intends to impose on one.
This does not mean the Copilot complaints fall under the DMA. The report doesn't name a legal route, and Copilot is not a listed gatekeeper service on the BCA's page. National abuse-of-dominance or tying rules are also possible. GCR's topic tags for the story include "Abuse of dominance" and "Tying", but tags are not a legal basis.
The Teams precedent, handled carefully
Europe has dealt with a Microsoft suite-bundling dispute before. The Commission sent Microsoft a statement of objections over Teams in June 2024. It was concerned that Microsoft had tied Teams to its core SaaS productivity applications since at least April 2019. The Commission's own news listing records that on 12 September 2025 it accepted commitments from Microsoft on Teams.
That case was run by the European Commission, over a different product, with a different complainant history and factual record. It shows how European enforcers have treated suite tying. It does not show that Copilot will follow the same path or end in the same remedies.
Not an isolated signal
Other regulators have recently looked at Copilot's packaging, mostly from a pricing and transparency angle rather than a tying one:
- UK: The Competition and Markets Authority opened an investigation into whether customers were misled about Microsoft 365 plans and prices after Copilot was added. The Register reports the probe is at an early stage and the CMA has not determined whether Microsoft broke consumer law.
- Italy: A WindowsForum report from June describes an Italian probe into whether Microsoft adequately informed consumers that Microsoft 365 had been integrated with Copilot and Designer.
These are consumer-protection matters, separate from the Belgian complaints. Together they suggest regulators are watching how AI features are folded into subscriptions. The Belgian story is the first of these to frame the issue as bundling, but only on the strength of a one-sentence report.
What IT admins can do now
Nothing here requires action, but it is a sensible moment to get your own house in order.
- Inventory your entitlements. Know which users have only Copilot Chat and which hold a paid Copilot license. Microsoft recommends the Copilot License Details diagnostic to check whether a specific account meets the requirements for Copilot features.
- Check network allowances. Microsoft's documentation says the Copilot app's primary URL is moving to copilot.cloud.microsoft. It advises allowing *.cloud.microsoft and the Copilot endpoints. It also says to verify that proxies, firewalls, Conditional Access, tenant restrictions and app-control policies aren't blocking the app.
- Use tenant restrictions, not a blanket block, to control personal account sign-in. Microsoft says not to block copilot.cloud.microsoft for that purpose.
- Document your licensing choices. If regulators eventually require unbundled or alternative plan options, as happened with Teams, you will want a clear record of current entitlements.
Analysis
Microsoft will argue, as it has before, that integration benefits customers. Complainants will say that including a product in the suite pushes out standalone competitors. Neither side's case is visible yet in the public record.
The practical question for enterprises is whether regulators eventually require Microsoft to offer Copilot-free suite options, or to separate Copilot's availability from other products. The Teams commitments are one model. But that outcome took years from complaint to resolution, so don't expect near-term changes to your Microsoft 365 agreements.
What to watch next:
- whether the BCA confirms a formal case
- which Copilot products and licensing terms the complaints name
- which legal framework is invoked
- whether the BCA informs the Commission, which it must do for national investigations against a gatekeeper
- any statement from Microsoft
Until then, this is a complaint, reported secondhand from a paywalled article, about a product family that Microsoft keeps reshaping.