Are you only reading the first few words of my comments, and ignoring the rest?  It&#x27;s right there. A new rule that reduces the term opens up old works earlier than if the contemporary rule is left in place.<p>Let&#x27;s consider something other than copyright.  It is bad to retroactively prosecute people for new crimes, but (for example) should people convicted of sodomy prior to 2003 have to serve out their (up to life) sentences, or since the act is no longer illegal, should they be freed?  Surely, if an act is no longer a crime, it&#x27;s abhorrent to treat people who have committed that act as criminals.