Professor Edward Adams's article, both in terms of its basic structure and the myriad of options it offers, neatly highlights the basic dilemma facing the Drafting Committee as it addresses the future Article 9 filing system. As he correctly notes, the filing system's shortcomings are largely due to its continued dependence on paper records, despite the increasing sophistication and availability of computerized information technology for both filing and searching. Should the Drafting Committee maintain the basics of the current system (a public, paper-based filing system) and merely attempt to identify and correct the existing shortcomings in that system, with some limited use of new information technology? Or should the Committee take a more aggressive approach and attempt to cure the “systemic” defects Professor Adams identifies in the current system?
R. Wilson Freyermuth, Comments on A Revised Filing System, 79 Minn. L. Rev. 957 (1995)