Core Viewpoint - Doubts have arisen regarding the future role of Anuradha Mittal as chair of Ben & Jerry's board in the context of its parent company Unilever's ice cream spin-off, The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) [1][4]. Group 1: Leadership Changes - Anuradha Mittal joined Ben & Jerry's in 2007 and became the independent chair in 2018, prior to Unilever's acquisition of the company [2]. - The SEC filing suggests that Mittal may no longer meet the criteria to serve on the Ben & Jerry's board, following internal investigations [4]. Group 2: Disputes and Autonomy - The situation escalated after co-founder Jerry Greenfield's departure amid disputes with Unilever over the company's autonomy and adherence to its social values [3]. - Cohen and Greenfield have expressed concerns about Unilever's influence, requesting that Ben & Jerry's operate as an independently owned company rather than being absorbed into TMICC [7]. Group 3: Potential Legal Actions - The SEC filing indicates that the group may consider legal actions against TMICC and/or Unilever based on the results of the internal investigations [5]. - There is a possibility that the Ben & Jerry's board may initiate proceedings against the group or its employees as a response to the findings [6].

Core Viewpoint - The founders of Ben & Jerry's are urging Unilever to allow the ice cream brand to operate independently, expressing concerns over Unilever's failure to honor commitments made during the 2000 acquisition [1][3][7] Company Operations - Unilever plans to spin off its ice cream operations, creating a new entity called The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC), which will include Ben & Jerry's and other brands like Solero, Cornetto, Twister, and Carte D'Or, and will be listed on exchanges in London, Amsterdam, and New York [2] Founders' Concerns - Cohen and Greenfield assert that Unilever has not respected the autonomy promised in the 2000 takeover agreement, which allowed Ben & Jerry's to pursue its social mission [3][4] - The founders claim that their brand's voice has been suppressed by Unilever, particularly regarding social justice issues, which contradicts the original vision they had for the company [4] Legal Actions - Ben & Jerry's has taken legal action against Unilever, alleging that the company attempted to silence its social mission by ousting its CEO and restricting public criticism of political figures and issues [5] - The ice cream brand previously halted sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, leading to Unilever's sale of its operations in the region to mitigate diplomatic tensions [6] Future Outlook - The founders believe that Ben & Jerry's should not be part of a corporate entity that does not support its founding mission, indicating a desire for the brand to operate independently from Unilever's influence [7]