Which is also what makes me really curious why it finally collapsed. Apparently Ben was spewing some real tanky bullshit with respect to Ukraine so it might not even be that Unilever’s lawyers finally found the loophole they needed.
Yes. That is the reported incident that finally led to the breakdown. But, regardless of what social media has taught us, this is not the first time israel has commit systematic genocide against Palestine and not even the first time B&J have publicly spoken out against it.
Its possible that the clause really was that B&J could say whatever they want to but not control sales contracts. But that also feels like one of those obvious things to put in said contractual requirements even 25 years ago.
And it is definitely tinfoil. But I’ve seen similar contracts/clauses in startups and research groups that were acquired. And a lot of times it boils down to “All business related actions will be brought up to a vote by the N people who signed this document or their legally designated proxy. Majority wins”.
Who could have guessed that selling out to a multinational corporation would compromise your independence on social issues?
I mean… they sold the company over 25 years ago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_%26_Jerry's#Unilever_era). They apparently had a lot of contractual clauses to let them continue with activism. And 25 years is a real good run.
Which is also what makes me really curious why it finally collapsed. Apparently Ben was spewing some real tanky bullshit with respect to Ukraine so it might not even be that Unilever’s lawyers finally found the loophole they needed.
When you put it that way, that is a lot longer than I would have expected it to last.
But it would have come sooner or later.
It was because Unilever was selling the ice cream in Israel and trying to suppress their pro Palestine messaging.
Yes. That is the reported incident that finally led to the breakdown. But, regardless of what social media has taught us, this is not the first time israel has commit systematic genocide against Palestine and not even the first time B&J have publicly spoken out against it.
Its possible that the clause really was that B&J could say whatever they want to but not control sales contracts. But that also feels like one of those obvious things to put in said contractual requirements even 25 years ago.
And it is definitely tinfoil. But I’ve seen similar contracts/clauses in startups and research groups that were acquired. And a lot of times it boils down to “All business related actions will be brought up to a vote by the N people who signed this document or their legally designated proxy. Majority wins”.
Really… They’re usually so nice and humane…