this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
141 points (96.7% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
7835 readers
237 users here now
Rules:
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
- Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
- If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this.
- Posts should use high-quality sources, and posts about an article should have the same headline as that article. You may edit your post if the source changes the headline. For a rough idea, check out this list.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
- Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
- This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean... they sold the company over 25 years ago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_%26_Jerry%27s#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.
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".
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.