Microsoft is still the same evil corporation it was before. The difference is Microsoft lost the OS wars in the end and are solving the problem through the threat of violence on OEMs who would rather not ship with Microsoft's offerings. They're utilizing patents and the courts/legal system (ie violence, theft, etc) to blackmail others into submission (or threat thereof).
Microsoft offers nothing of value to GNU/Linux users and those shipping with Android and similar operating systems. Those patents are all garbage. There is no reason we shouldn't be able to utilize a different file system if it were not for MS's monopoly. It was used (and some cases it wasn't even really used, like in the Tom Tom case) only to retain compatibility and that was because of Microsoft's monopoly which gave them the ability to refuse to implement support for other filesystems. Certainly this is monopolistic. If Microsoft had supported other filesystems like every other company we wouldn't be forced into utilizing it's shitty 'patented' filesystem. The patents don't actually provide anything of value. They are more or less a form of DRM. It's nothing more than a mechanism to force people to cough up cash to implement compatibility.
We should get rid of copyright, patents, and similar. The only one with some legitimacy are trademarks and that's an issue of fraud really. I shouldn't own the mark, just the right to sue for label, slander, and fraud should someone use it to deceive others into buying what they think is our product, etc. However I would argue that the case that patents are enforced in malicious ways against those not actually committing fraud. There is no reason someone should be prohibited from using a trademark provided it's not in a way to deceive. Utilizing it to criticize a company or on a product page linking to reviews or similar should not require permission. I'd even go so far as to argue patents should be limited to off-line scenarios and other systems of authentication should be implemented into the software to verify authenticity (we should never censor a site that sells fraudulent goods, but our technical systems should enable people to differentiate between legitimate and illegitimate, or between what people recognize thereof, so if I start using a name/brand/etc I build up a reputation under that name then anybody else using that name should be in competition for said name would have to spend a lot to overtake its legitimacy, and that might even not work should the history aspects factor in, plus category, so penguin, a company that distributes ICE is as legitimate as penguin, a company that publishes book, is as legitimate as penguin, a company that sells computers with the GNU/Linux support, etc).