Does the state have the right to consider Microsoft to be a monopoly?

This article deals with computer operating systems, their common features with classical monopolistic industries containing a natural monopoly element, and the right of the state to regulate monopolies according the philosophic principles of utilitarianism and laissez-faire. An analogy between operating system and infrastructure of network industry is presented. Fixed costs of building an infrastructure and the writing of a program are similar; they are indivisible and sunk. The marginal costs of maintaining the infrastructure and program licensing are low. Operating systems bear all identical features that define natural monopolies. The owner of an operating system can practice all kinds of predatory behavior known in oligopolistic industries. Therefore, we can consider operating system to be equivalent to monopolistic infrastructure and the society has a right to examine the behavior of the owner according the definitions of antimonopolistic laws and anticompetitive behavior.