Correction: Rowling was 'outed' by her lawyer's wife's friend.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/j...
If I was the law firm, I'd fire the lawyer.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/j...
If I was the law firm, I'd fire the lawyer.
From their handbook:
"Protection of confidential information is a fundamental feature of your relationship with clients. It exists as a concept both as a matter of law and as a matter of conduct. This duty continues despite the end of the retainer and even after the death of the client."
Publishers Little, Brown have since issued a reprint after
sales rose 415,000 per cent when the real author was unmasked.Really? A hardcover that's been out less than 3 months and that got favorable critical attention (and a lot of favorable Amazon reviews before the leak)?
I've heard it had sales of less than 2,000, which last time I checked (a long while ago, I admit) was considered to be OK for the first printing of a hardback and could result in a paperback run.
I welcome someone who knows the current market's number thresholds, not to mention this market segment, which I don't know, to weight in.
Normally intentionally "leaks" are just "anonymous sources" etc. They're very rarely if ever named.
Plus she doesn't need the money, she is one of the richest women in the world. I suspect she wrote under a different name to see if the book would stand on its own without her big name boosting sales.
Never underestimate what the rich and super rich will do to get more money.
Does Warran Buffet need more money? Yet he's still trying to make himself richer.
Do all the top CEO's, VCs, and board members in the world "need" more millions and billions? Maybe not. But it hasn't stopped them from trying to further enrich themselves.
Besides, there could be other motivations for this stunt, such as fame or wanting to be talked about or thought of as a certain type of author.
"I don't have a problem with guilt about money. The way I see it is that my money represents an enormous number of claim checks on society. It is like I have these little pieces of paper that I can turn into consumption. If I wanted to, I could hire 10,000 people to do nothing but paint my picture every day for the rest of my life. And the GNP would go up. But the utility of the product would be zilch, and I would be keeping those 10,000 people from doing AIDS research, or teaching, or nursing. I don't do that though. I don't use very many of those claim checks. There's nothing material I want very much. And I'm going to give virtually all of those claim checks to charity when my wife and I die."
Good one!
Doesn't have to be about money. Success and acclaim as equally addictive.
20 years ago, the lawyer would have told his wide's friend and she'd have gossiped it to a few other people and 5 years later it would have eventually been a well known secret that would be occasionally alluded to by the columnists of the papers. Rowling could still remain tantalisingly stum and no-one would be much the wiser.
Instead she says it on twitter which feels like a fairly intimate gossip to a few choice friends but in fact is massively public and boom, consequences for the Law firm, the lawyer and huge public embarrassment for the friend.
From a social point of view, the friend was just acting as she'd have acted 20 years ago, but technology is so different now that a simple piece of gossip has had very different consequences.
If I was Rowling, I'd fire the law firm if they didn't.