Harry Potter may soon be appearing on a Kindle near you. Rumor has it that Ms. Rowling is about to reverse her anti-ebook stance--and make a $100 million-plus pile of money. 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/jk-rowling-is-considering-harry-174382 

'Bout time, too. 

Never understood Ms. Rowling's reluctance to go digital, myself; IMHO, it has been akin to an author refusing to sell paperback and/or film-video rights to his/her originally-released-in-hard-cover book: puzzling to the extreme, raising suspicions regarding either/both ego and/or sanity. 

I'm tempted to ask "is she against Braille versions, too? How about foreign-language translations?" (tho admittedly, the latter can --and has-- resulted in some major travesties involving ham-fisted translators.) 

Upon occasion, I've listened patiently to observers speculating that writers are all-too-often emotionally wedded to the ink-on-dead-trees artifact. Sure, some are-- just as some insist on the awkward conceit of doiing their writing on typewriters (or even in longhand). 

And that's fine, if it works for them. But being a Luddite didn't accomplish the stated goal ("preserving jobs from technology") the first time it was tried. Unless you're a typesetter or a printer, eschewing digital formats clearly won't help with your job security-- content is content, and writers provide this singular, essential ingredient... 

... so what WAS the motivation in J.K.'s madness? What has changed now? 

To my knowledge, aside from a few ruminations about piracy (has she even HEARD about the Chinese?) she hasn't said. Anybody hear anything to the contrary from her? 

E-books are merely a delivery system-- and an inevitable, wildly more effective one, for sure. Ms. Rowling is well advised to put her sabots back on her feet, and run (not walk, tho even inching along in wooden shoes is reportedly difficult) to embrace what is already the "present," much less the "future". 

--Earl "Damn! Carving These Runes On An Oak Plank Is TIRING!" Merkel