I think there's a related phenomenon that we see all the time in automotive circles. A vehicle manufacturer (OEM) needs a new thing, so a supplier develops it in cooperation with them. Great! The requirements were vague and all that, but you arrive at a solution that works. The supplier documents the performance in a product specification stating what it can do and under what conditions. Great! Next the OEM asks for quotes on next gen, and also goes to other suppliers to see if they can provide at lower cost. The OEM uses your product spec as a requirements document and this is where it all goes to shit (a product specification is not a requirements document). They no longer know what they need, but the know what they have and they want "same or better" next time. Over time this can lead to absurd specs and increased complexity to meet them. Sometimes a competitor comes in with a cheaper version and the OEM gets excited based on price and all the actual requirements might get revisited because the cheaper part is out of spec (to save cost).

This seems similar to the Postel's Law thing. If you produce to spec but accept things out of spec, the ecosystem will unofficially change the spec to what's actually out there. Then people will re-apply Postel's Law with a wider spec on what you produce and even wider on what you accept. Eventually you end up with a complex mess, but in this case it's a widening spec where in the automotive example it's usually a narrowing spec.