As free anti virus solutions already exist and this software is optional, I don't really see how Trend Micro has a leg to stand on? I can fully understand why they're unhappy because it's doing them out of business, but surely that's just the way the world works?
Typical, bad software trying to compete on a legal platform rather than a technology one.
Those that can, do. Those that can't, sue.
Just ask the Opera team about that.
If the ComputerWorld article is correct, it would appear that Trend Micro can't even get their facts straight regarding MSE...
Trend Micro's response shows a poor understanding of the action Microsoft has taken. MSE is being offered not through Windows Update, but through the related Microsoft Update service. Microsoft Update, which updates a broad range of Microsoft products and occasionally offers new ones, requires a deliberate opt-in: it isn't enabled by default. Moreover, MSE will only be offered to customers who do not have an existing antivirus product installed—and in any case is offered as an optional download.
Though an antirust suit over an optional download that is only offered after enabling an optional feature seems unlikely, that competitors would even raise such concerns shows Microsoft's uniquely peculiar position in the industry. The third-party software vendors are more than happy to insist that Windows needs antivirus software and that using a Windows machine without such software is dangerous—but if Microsoft agrees with their assessment and tries to improve the situation itself, they threaten to cry foul. (Source)
tried to kill off ClamAV a few years ago with bogus patent threats. It is pretty obvious they only care about making money, rather than producing better software. If MSE wasn't any good, would they still bother complaining?