> One could argue that using anti-competitive laws to prevent people from controlling their platform

This is a false view of how anti-trust law works.

If a company is engaging in anti-competitive practices, and has significant market power, this is illegal. And the courts can absolutely force a company to engage or not engage in certain actions.

Courts have already ruled on this. Just go look at the microsoft case. The courts forced microsoft to take certain actions.

This is a settled, legal issue, lol. The courts can absolutely force companies to stop engaging in anti-competitive practices, according to the sherman anti-trust act.

The courts can also force a company to sell to certain people and engage in certain business practices, if refusing to do is would be anti-competitive.

> You could argue that my car is my platform

Bad analogy. The reason why it is bad, is because a singular car is not a hundred billion dollar business.

If, instead, you controlled 50% of the car industry, though, then the government could absolutely force you to do things, or not do things, if your actions are ruled anti-competitive, as according to the Sherman anti-trust act.

> you are being anti-competitive, and that isn't fair!

Anti competitive actions are only illegal if you have significant market power. 1 person, with a single car does not have significant market power. Instead, I would have to control 50% of a 100 billion dollar business, in order for it to be illegal to engage in anti-competitive behavior.