Between 1927 and 1931, 66,947 books were published in the United States.
Only 646 of them, fewer than 1%, remain in print, according to the
American Library Assn.
Internet archivists say they could make such material easily and freely
available. For example, the New Yorker magazine from its early days in
the 1920s could be revived for a new audience, but Internet publishers
say the extended copyrights block them from adding such material.

Until this year, it was assumed the proper term for copyrights was a
matter for Congress alone. After all, the Constitution says,

"The Congress shall have the power to ... promote the progress of
science the useful arts, by securing for limited But under Chief
Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Supreme Court has cast a skeptical eye
at Congress. Rehnquist and his colleagues regularly repeat a line
written in 1803 by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury vs. Madison,
that the "powers of the legislature are defined and limited." The
Rehnquist Court is happy to add the limits to Congress' power when
lawmakers exceed them.

In recent years, for example, the justices have struck down federal laws
on gun possession and violence against women on the grounds that these
had nothing to do with the regulation of commerce. Congress can regulate
interstate commerce, Rehnquist said, but a sexual assault is not
commerce.

In February, the court surprised copyright experts and entertainment
industry lawyers when it took up a broad challenge to Congress' power to
extend copyrights. The challengers say this extension of copyrights for
older works does not promote progress. It simply enriches the heirs of
earlier creators. But film industry leaders and the families of famous
composers and authors have fought back, arguing that they have the
greatest commitment to reviving old works for today's audience. Lawyers
for the Motion Picture Assn. of America point to the economics of
restoring old movies..... For more on the case see here and here.