I'm looking for examples of UX/interface design where:

* users started using a feature in a way that wasn't intended (can be for good or for ill)
* the product team responded by removing the feature entirely

Also very interested in interfaces where there is an obvious feature that users would want/need that's not provided, and that feature is obviously not provided because it's against the interests of the company who makes the software.

Can anyone think of examples which fit?

@shauna Accessibility APIs on Android are another example. They let external apps see what’s currently displayed on the screen, click on things and intercept the user’s touches. This is used by software that helps disabled users, for example, screen readers need to see what’s on the screen to describe it to a blind person, intercept touch gestures to provide a more accessible way to choose which item to click, and then make the actual click when the user makes a choice, regardless of whether that choice was made on the actual touchscreen, with a keyboard or with an external Braille display connected over Bluetooth. Voice / eyeball / switch control apps use those same APIs in similar ways. Those APIs are also used by malicious software to spy on your banking activity and click on things in your banking app without your consent or knowledge (to wire all the money out of your account to god knows where). Because of this, some banking apps made themselves inaccessible for screen readers and other such software on purpose, some only enable their accessibility if you use some software that they specifically allow, and if you use a third-party screen reader that isn't on the list, you're out of luck. Even Google is cracking down on this, making it more difficult to install and enable apps utilizing those APIs as well as publish them on Google Play.