> [..] is consistent, long-term, and value-based ownership [..] this disqualifies taking outside investment, either through venture capital or going public.
They should switch to a cooperative co-owned by workers and customers then. It the easiest legal-entity way of ensuring that continuity. (Coops cannot "take outside investment" nor "go public"; Mullvad would be owned by stakeholders rather than shareholders)
Yes, in Sweden you have a number of legal constructs to use.
You can organize a company as a cooperation. It is not a specific legal form of business, but a version of a normal limited company. It is used for non-profit businesses, for example a day care.
You can also form a business association - which is fairly common for non-profit organizations. Typically house owners that share a road, have a small pier for their boats etc.
Finally you can create a foundation. The foundation has no owners or members, but has a board. It is typically used to manage wealth, often for charity purposes (which I think matches the term used in the U.S.). The most famous foundation in Sweden is probably IKEA[0].
(INAL etc. And [0] yes, I know that the IKEA HQ is in Switzerland, with foundation operations in Holland IRRC. But it was founded in Sweden - and we get mixed up with Switzerland all the time anyway so... ;-)
They should switch to a cooperative co-owned by workers and customers then. It the easiest legal-entity way of ensuring that continuity. (Coops cannot "take outside investment" nor "go public"; Mullvad would be owned by stakeholders rather than shareholders)