We saw the same with the printing press: the Powers That Be first banned it, then tried to control it, and eventually had to relent.

All of those phases have already happened - banning (RIAA lawsuits), control (iTunes), relent (Spotify). We've reached the endgame - it's streaming.

If you want to store and maintain a personal 128GB collection of MP3 files with incomplete titles and data, that's your prerogative, but you're going to be in a tiny minority.

It's still around, but I never hear about anyone using it even though it's more flexible than Napster.

A major feature and downside, depending on who you are, is that you can browse all files a user is sharing. This is great for discovering new things, but also means that copyright holders could sue you for all shared files, not just one at a time like with Bittorrent.

Thinking about it, Kazaa was also more flexible than Napster and maybe a stronger household name than DC++.

http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/

If you put your music up on Youtube for free then you become the main source that everyone links to because it's available. You gain control back of your data, rather than having someone pirate it.

There's a number of musicians I see on Youtube who release everything they put out for free, but then have optional links to buy it on various music platforms. A lot of them are happy with the set up because they can make a living doing what they love.

The same strategy applies to writing apps and open source in general, and it's even more beneficial because unlike a personally developed music track, an application greatly benefits from having multiple people work on it.

[1] https://questioncopyright.org/promise

" had to relent "

You mean they totally embraced, rebranded and used it and it as a tool of mass control.

Napster is the future of the internet.

The "Napster" brand still exists. Its now a streaming service and competitor to spotify.