Yes, but Dainesse isn't going to give away any details of their design. Even a white paper would be fairly generic since they aren't about to give away any proprietary design or algorithms, even if protected under patent.
Test methodologies, data and results would be good to have out there to be reviewed. I think that this is the biggest bone of contention with Ligety, assuming this isn't a competitive thing with Slytech. His assertion is that FIS is pushing this on athletes but there is no substantial, reviewed sport-specific testing, no transparency "just trust us it's for your safety", as the GS ski dimensions were based on a single, commissioned study that didn't necessarily stand up to review rigor.
In fact, companies typically make judgement calls about what to reveal and not reveal in a white paper, balancing saying too much against what is good for marketing. In this case, I do not believe there would be significant proprietary concerns with revealing and discussing (if the case) that they are using crash recording to help product development, since this is such an obvious thing to do -- and, further, it would provide them with a good marketing benefit.
I agree there should be transparency about test methodologies and results -- in particular, that FIS should require Dainese to release this data to the national teams, so it can be reviewed by their own experts. Maybe this is already being done. Note that FIS has the power to do this, since they decide whether these are allowed (or required) in FIS races.