One is copyright law in the 1920s and the other is copyright law today. Is one right and the other wrong? Or are each potentially just, but one coming after corporations have usurped a great amount of power and authority that used to belong to the American people in a republic created by the people, of the people and for the people?
Personally, I come down somewhere in the middle. I think the creator of art should make all the money that can be made from sale of his art in a reasonable amount of time (say, 20 years). But art is unique in that it is put "out there" and, at some point, becomes indelibly part of the culture at large and thus legally public domain. I think that happens long before the artist grows old and dies, much less 75 years later.
In my morality, which would be exceedingly generous to copyright holders a mere 80 years ago, Star Wars would have long become part of the public domain. Whatever your particular take on copyright law might be, will you deny that Star Wars has become an indelible part of the culture at large???