Nick Martell

Yeah, today we're facing the big business beef.

What is it, Jack?

Unilever allegedly suppresses Ben & Jerry's brand from speaking out on the issues that it's always spoken out on.

Unilever fires the Ben & Jerry's CEO, allegedly because of political speech taken by the brand.

And your co-founder, Jerry, quits Ben & Jerry's, sadly, last year.

Your best friend says he can, in good conscience, remain an employee now that the brand is no longer having independence.

So you're now fighting like hell, as you've put it, to free Ben & Jerry's.

So essentially, Unilever, well, now Magnum, because Unilever spun off the ice cream division into a separate company.

has suppressed the free speech rights that you fought for when you sold Ben and Jerry's to Unilever.

Now, on the other hand, Unilever is thinking the world has changed.

Politics are more divisive than ever, and the cultural conversation has moved on, and they're seeing a business risk here.

That's their kind of case.

The business risk they're seeing is that Ben and Jerry's outspoken activism is putting the rest of this gigantic corporation at risk.

So, Ben, what would you say?

Is that a fair characterization of the situation and where we are right now?

So you would argue, Ben, that first of all,

The contract that was agreed to in the year 2000 is being violated, right?

Is there court action being taken on that side of things?

But on the other hand, Ben, you would also argue that not letting Ben & Jerry's speak up like it always has is going to begin to erode the brand that people love and start to hurt the business, right?

So let's talk now about the hashtag that you launched last year, Free Ben & Jerry's.