The list of types of abusive conduct in which a monopoly may engage is not closed.  First, limiting production at a shipping port by refusing to raise expenditure and update technology could be abusive.  Tying one product into the sale of another can be considered abuse too, being restrictive of consumer choice and depriving competitors of outlets. This was the alleged case in Microsoft Corp v Commission  leading to an eventual fine of €497 million for including its Windows Media Player with the Microsoft Windows platform. A refusal to supply a facility essential for all businesses attempting to compete can constitute an abuse. However the extent to which companies should be compelled under competition law is controversial. This is because although the European Commission has been liberal in stating such practices as abusive for the purposes of Article 102 TFEU, the European Court of Justice has adopted a very cautious approach.  Three requirements have been laid down by the European Court of Justice which are that; the refusal must have been unjustified, it must have excluded competition on the secondary market and that it must have prevented a new product from emerging in face of growing need for said product.  An example was a case involving a medical company named Commercial Solvents .  When it set up its own rival in the tuberculosis drugs market, Commercial Solvents were forced to continue supplying a company named Zoja with the raw materials for the drug. Zoja was the only market competitor, so without the court forcing supply, all competition would have been eliminated.