Perhaps. Works out of print and not in circulation do present a vexation, and perhaps a wrong to be remedied. Protecting the creator's right to those works gives the creator little to nothing, and deprives the public of their use; this seems an odd allocation of the public resources needed to protect the rights. Clearly a matter for legal clarification.
Some cases, though, are clear: authors make more money if they, their agents, and their publishers, agree to let a work stay unavailable for a time then reissue it. This is not so much a phenomenon of the public as it is of the distribution system, but in any event, it does work, and your scheme would destroy that stratagem. Is this your intent? Is it your right?
Jerry Pournelle on Copyright and Napster [1]
Ninety-nine percent of what I have created in the last fifteen years is in print and available. There hasn't been a month go by since 1979 that I haven't made money on the story in Cerebus #1. Cerebus is creator-owned, yes, but more important it is creator-controlled. The critical element of control is a work being in print and available. If it is not in print and available and you would like it to be, you do not have control over it.
Dave Sim's Pro-Con '93 Speech [2]
This is the second time [3] I've referenced Dave Sim, [4] the comic book artist responsible for Cerebus, but it's interesting reading the two contrasting points of view here.
[1] http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail111.html#Sunday
[2] http://www.teleport.com/~ennead/ampersand/sim/procon.html