404
'Set us free': Ben & Jerry's enlists support of fans to separate from parent company
(www.middleeasteye.net)
this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
404 points (98.3% liked)
politics
25657 readers
3892 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
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
If all the employees/execs agree, could they quit en masse and form a new company? I guess they'd need to build new factories. And maybe run afoul of non competes.
But yeah, seems like selling your soul and then asking the public to ransom it for you is irresponsible.
Unilever probably owns all the copyrights on their flavors, and maybe on dinner other stuff like production processes.
Generally speaking, recipes can't be copyrighted (the specific wording of a written recipe might be protected, but the general idea of combining certain ingredients in a specific way can't)
The names of the flavors, branding, etc. can be (or trademarked, or various other IP terms)
And aspects of the production process might be covered by patents and such.
And of course non-competes and such could complicate things for the actual people involved
And how you acquire those recipes can be a factor, that could rub up against non-disclosure agreements, corporate espionage laws, etc. you may need to be able to say that you came up with it on your own independent of the original recipe or pieced it together from publicly available information.
But in general, if anyone wanted to start up an ice cream company selling exact duplicates of Ben & Jerry's flavors,they could do that as long as they called them all something different
Jesse, WTF are you talking about?
They could trademark the flavor names and copyright the carton art, but they can't copyright the recipes themselves.
He says in his first paragraph:
They'll try, and our current crop of government would allow it
No, this is just stupid
Again, consider the government
No, this is about the poster being ignorant about what different things are.
I know "government is dumb!" is a good lazy meme, though.
It's less about just dumb but corrupt. The siding with mega corps is pretty much a given no matter how dumb the case
I think, in certain cases, they can. IANAL, but I'm thinking about the formula for Coke or KFC's 11 herbs and spices recipe. Aren't those consider trade secrets? I mean they probably can't protect "vanilla," but they can trademark their specific formulation named something like "virgin snow vanilla?" I actually cringed a bit writing that...
edit: spelling
Okay, yeah, if Ben and Jerry (the people) have signed non-disclosure agreements preventing them from using their knowledge of the recipes at another company, that could indeed be an issue.
But what threw me off reading your comment is that trade secrets have absolutely fuck-all to do with copyright.
RMS has a good explainer about how trying to glom the unrelated concepts of copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets together as "intellectual property" is actively harmful loaded language, and falling for it results in the kind of cognitive bias and misunderstanding that you just exhibited. It's more important than you probably yet appreciate that you make an effort to keep those concepts separate in your mind and talk about them with precision.
His overall point seems to be that, because intellectual property consists of several things with distinctions among them, the use of a categorical term is incorrect. This seems flawed, as all categories are defined as such. The only problem OP has here is a lack of familiarity with those individual components, i.e. to know that trade secret is different than copyright/trademark. I don't see how getting rid of the term IP would help to educate people on those differences.
It's right there in the name, trade SECRETS.
Those are kept safe by legal agreements compelling secrecy, not letting most people know the secrets and other methods, but, if the secrets got out, the person who leaked it might get in trouble for breaking a legal contract or breaking and entering or whatever, but, the rest of the world would be able to legally sell things made using those recipes, but they probably wouldn't be able to reference the original company directly (ie, Crowns Chicken, now using KFCs original recipe!) ... "11 herbs and spices" is probably a term that's trademarked too, but I'm sure some marketing person would find a creative way to tell everyone.
"IANAL" probably stands for something but I'm going to just read as if you like it in the tushie.
Hah. It's I am not a lawyer.
Still a hilariously bad acronym 😂