Platforms tightening the screws on third-party builders

Three threads landed on the same bruise today. Spotify is in the process of killing librespot, the open-source library that powers nearly every third-party Spotify client. Anthropic quietly told users it would no longer allow Claude Code subscriptions to be used via third-party harnesses like OpenClaw, framing it as a 'system strain' issue while offering a one-time credit as a consolation. And Google Play told AnkiDroid it cannot link to its Open Collective donation page, citing rules around tax-exempt donations, even though the actual tax status involved (501(c)(6)) doesn't clearly meet their definition.

The pattern here: each of these is a platform using policy or technical access as a lever to push users toward first-party monetization or away from behaviors that reduce platform control. Spotify wants you in their app. Anthropic wants you on their API billing, not a flat subscription. Google wants billing to flow through Play. None of these companies said 'we want more money,' but that's the functional outcome.

The counterpoint raised in threads: some commenters defended Anthropic's move as predictable and disclosed in advance, and noted that heavy subscription users were likely consuming far more compute than priced. But the AnkiDroid situation is harder to defend: a free, open-source education app losing a donation link because of an ambiguous tax classification is exactly the kind of collateral damage that makes developers distrust platform ownership.