No, for a pretty simple reason. She wouldn't have bothered with all the effort to try and stay hidden if she didn't mean it. She doesn't need the money.
At least one editor has already admitted to passing on the book, not knowing Rowling wrote it, so she went through the "normal" means of querying under the pen name, not saying "I'm JK Rowling, and I want to publish under a pseudonym"
I will say though, it will look fishier if the Lawyer who leaked the information isn't reprimanded or fired, since he broke client confidentiality.
Comments
No, for a pretty simple reason. She wouldn't have bothered with all the effort to try and stay hidden if she didn't mean it. She doesn't need the money.
At least one editor has already admitted to passing on the book, not knowing Rowling wrote it, so she went through the "normal" means of querying under the pen name, not saying "I'm JK Rowling, and I want to publish under a pseudonym"
I will say though, it will look fishier if the Lawyer who leaked the information isn't reprimanded or fired, since he broke client confidentiality.
Except that the lawyer is a partner and partners aren't just "fired".
Isn't that worse though? Its seems that a partner breaching confidentiality is a good reason for large clients to walk away from the firm.
They certainly can be. Partnership agreements normally cover this type of thing in great detail.