If a corporation were trying to depreciate an open-source alternative to one of their projects, it might look like spreading negative propaganda about the open-source alternative or highlighting the perceived weaknesses of the alternative. For example:

FUD: The corporation may spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) about the open-source alternative, such as by suggesting that it is not secure, reliable, or compatible with other systems.

Highlighting perceived weaknesses: The corporation may highlight perceived weaknesses of the open-source alternative, such as by emphasizing areas where it falls short compared to the corporation's proprietary solution.

Undermining community support: The corporation may attempt to undermine community support for the open-source alternative by spreading misinformation about the project's development or suggesting that it lacks the necessary resources to succeed.

Offering alternative solutions: The corporation may offer alternative solutions that they claim are superior to the open-source alternative, such as by highlighting their own proprietary products or services.

Funding competitors: The corporation may fund competitors who are developing similar solutions to the open-source alternative, with the intention of creating negative publicity or drawing attention away from the alternative.

These tactics can be effective in diminishing support for the open-source alternative, but they can also be perceived as unethical and manipulative, potentially damaging the corporation's reputation and relationship with the open-source community.