tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-678695784698978970.post7501740600953634485..comments2024-03-24T07:05:18.668-04:00Comments on Commercial Law: So, Why the Disconnect?Jim Chenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13981455878475838042noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-678695784698978970.post-44144835293233842432008-05-03T06:42:00.000-04:002008-05-03T06:42:00.000-04:00Thanks, Joe. Ken's reprint arrived in the mail ea...Thanks, Joe. Ken's reprint arrived in the mail earlier this week. I look forward to seeing what he has to say about, among other things, Revised Article 7.Keith A. Rowleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10858247800288682986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-678695784698978970.post-10830143016671020622008-05-01T18:27:00.000-04:002008-05-01T18:27:00.000-04:00Not to be too snarky, but UCC 7 doesn't do much. ...Not to be too snarky, but UCC 7 doesn't do much. Its main positive accomplishment is to eliminate outdated gender references in the statute.<BR/><BR/>Its main accomplishment is to introduce electronic documents of title. I wouldn't call this a positive. I could go on an extended rant of my own, but Ken Kettering has already published about half the points I would have made: more than enough evidence to hang the horse thief. Kenneth C. Kettering, Securitization and Its Discontents, 29 Cardozo L. Rev. 1553, 1702-10 (2008).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com