-- I really think this is an important question and, as Justice O'Connor points out, if we have to ask what's the most plausible explanation for this rule, to reward existing vested interest or to stimulate former new works, it seems to me that it's probably the former.

Based on that paragraph can we conclude that this sentence is true?
Justice O'Connor thinks for sure that rewarding existing vested interest is the most plausible explanation.
It's impossible to say