View source for Fear, uncertainty, and doubt

{{Short description|Tactic used to influence opinion}}
{{Use list-defined references|date=January 2022}}

'''Fear, uncertainty and doubt''' (often shortened to '''FUD''') is a manipulative [[Social:Propaganda|propaganda]] tactic used in sales, [[Finance:Marketing|marketing]], [[Social:Public relations|public relations]], politics, [[Opinion poll|polling]] and cults. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information, and is a manifestation of the [[Social:Appeal to fear|appeal to fear]].

=={{anchor|IBM}}Definition==
The term "fear, uncertainty and doubt" appeared as far back as the 1920s,<ref name="Yarbrough_1920"/><ref name="Gardner_1926"/> whereas the similar formulation "doubts, fears and uncertainties" reaches back to 1693.<ref name="Payne_1695"/><ref name="Payne_1708"/> By 1975, the term was appearing abbreviated as FUD in marketing and sales contexts<ref name="Clothes_1975"/> as well as in [[Social:Public relations|public relations]]:<ref name="LeadRefs000"/>

{{quote|One of the messages dealt with is FUD—the fear, uncertainty and doubt on the part of customer and sales person alike that stifles the approach and greeting.<ref name="Clothes_1975"/>}}

The abbreviation FUD is also alternatively rendered as "fear, uncertainty and disinformation".<ref name="Netlingo_2002"/>

FUD was first used with its common current technology-related meaning by [[Biography:Gene Amdahl|Gene Amdahl]] in 1975, after he left IBM to found his own company, [[Company:Amdahl Corporation|Amdahl Corp.]]:<ref name="JF"/>

{{quote|FUD is the fear, uncertainty and doubt that IBM sales people instill in the minds of potential customers who might be considering Amdahl products.<ref name="JF"/>}}

This usage of FUD to describe disinformation in the [[Computer hardware|computer hardware]] industry is said to have led to subsequent popularization of the term.<ref name="Elliott000"/>

As Eric S. Raymond wrote:<ref name="JF"/>

{{quote|The idea, of course, was to persuade buyers to go with safe IBM gear rather than with competitors' equipment. This implicit coercion was traditionally accomplished by promising that ''Good Things'' would happen to people who stuck with IBM, but ''Dark Shadows'' loomed over the future of competitors' equipment or software. After 1991, the term has become generalized to refer to any kind of [[Social:Disinformation|disinformation]] used as a competitive weapon.<ref name="JF"/>}}

By spreading questionable information about the drawbacks of less well-known products, an established company can discourage decision-makers from choosing those products over its own, regardless of the relative ''technical'' merits. This is a recognized phenomenon, epitomized by the traditional axiom of purchasing agents that "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM equipment". The aim is to have [[Engineering:Information technology|IT]] departments buy software they know to be technically inferior because upper management is more likely to recognize the brand.

== Examples ==
=== Tobacco Industry ===
{{see|Tobacco industry playbook}}
The strategy of deliberately sowing doubts about scientific findings was used by the tobacco industry.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.naag.org/issues/tobacco/ | title=Learn How Attorneys General Enforce Tobacco Regulation }}</ref>

=== Software producers ===
==== Microsoft ====
From the 1990s onward, the term became most often associated with [[Company:Microsoft|Microsoft]]. Roger Irwin said:<ref name="Irwin_1998"/>
{{quote|Microsoft soon picked up the art of FUD from IBM, and throughout the '80s used FUD as a primary marketing tool, much as IBM had in the previous decade. They ended up out FUD-ing IBM themselves during the OS/2 vs Win3.1 years.}}

In 1996, Caldera, Inc. accused Microsoft of several anti-competitive practices, including issuing [[Vaporware|vaporware]] announcements, creating FUD, and excluding competitors from participating in beta-test programs in order to destroy competition in the [[Engineering:DOS|DOS]] market.<ref name="Caldera_1999_Statement_of_facts"/><ref name="Caldera_Fullstory_Tech"/>
One of the claims was related to having modified [[Software:Windows 3.1|Windows 3.1]] so that it would not run on DR DOS 6.0 although there were no technical reasons for it not to work.<ref name="Caldera_1999_Statement_of_facts"/><ref name="Caldera_1999_FactRel"/> This was caused by the so-called [[Software:AARD code|AARD code]], some encrypted piece of code, which had been found in a number of Microsoft programs. The code would fake nonsensical [[Error message|error message]]s if run on DR&nbsp;DOS, like:<ref name="Schulman_1993_AARD"/><ref name="Schulman_1994_Undocumented-DOS"/><ref name="Reynolds_1991"/>

{{quote|Non-Fatal error detected: error #2726<br />Please contact Windows 3.1 beta support<br />Press ENTER to exit or C to continue<ref name="Schulman_1993_AARD"/><ref name="Schulman_1994_Undocumented-DOS"/><ref name="Reynolds_1991"/>}}

If the user chose to press {{keypress|C}}, Windows would continue to run on DR&nbsp;DOS without problems. There was speculation that the purpose of this code was to create doubts about DR&nbsp;DOS's [[Software incompatibility|compatibility]] and thereby destroy the product's [[Social:Reputation|reputation]];<ref name="Schulman_1993_AARD"/><ref name="Schulman_1994_Undocumented-DOS"/> internal Microsoft memos published as part of the ''United States v. Microsoft'' antitrust case later confirmed this.<ref name="Lea_1999_Register"/> At one point, Microsoft CEO [[Biography:Bill Gates|Bill Gates]] sent a memo to a number of employees, reading
{{quote|You never sent me a response on the question of what things an app would do that would make it run with [[Software:MS-DOS|MS-DOS]] and not run with DR-DOS. Is there [a] feature they have that might get in our way?<ref name="Caldera_1999_Statement_of_facts"/><ref name="cnet"/>}} Microsoft Senior Vice President Brad Silverberg later sent another memo, stating
{{quote|What the [user] is supposed to do is feel uncomfortable, and when he has bugs, suspect that the problem is DR-DOS and then go out to buy MS-DOS.<ref name="Caldera_1999_Statement_of_facts"/><ref name="cnet"/>}} In 2000, Microsoft settled the lawsuit out-of-court for an undisclosed sum, which in 2009 was revealed to be $280 million.<ref name="Groklaw_2009_NovellWP"/><ref name="Caldera_Microsoft_2000_Settlement"/><ref name="Microsoft_2009_Memorandum"/><ref name="Gomes_2000_Settlement"/>

At around the same time, the leaked internal Microsoft "Halloween documents" stated "[[Open source|OSS [Open Source Software]]] is long-term credible… [therefore] FUD tactics cannot be used to combat it."<ref name="ESR_Halloween"/>
Open source software, and the [[Software:Linux|Linux]] community in particular, are widely perceived as frequent targets of Microsoft's FUD:
* Statements about the "viral nature"<ref name="Microsoft_Viral"/> of the [[Software:GNU General Public License|GNU General Public License]] (GPL).
* Statements that "…FOSS [Free and open source software] infringes on no fewer than 235 Microsoft [[Social:Patent|patent]]s", before software patent law precedents were even established.<ref name="Parloff_2007_1"/><ref name="Parloff_2007_2"/>
* Statements that [[Software:Windows Server 2003|Windows Server 2003]] has lower [[Total cost of ownership|total cost of ownership]] (TCO) than Linux, in Microsoft's "Get-The-Facts" campaign. It turned out that they were comparing Linux on a very expensive IBM mainframe to Windows Server 2003 on an Intel Xeon-based server.<ref name="BBC_2004_Ad"/><ref name="CNET_2004_Ad"/>
* A 2010 video claimed that [[Software:OpenOffice.org|OpenOffice.org]] had a higher long-term cost of ownership, as well as poor [[Engineering:Interoperability|interoperability]] with [[Software:Microsoft Office|Microsoft's own office suite]]. The video featured statements such as "If an open source [[Freeware|freeware]] solution breaks, who's gonna fix it?"<ref name="Protalinski_2000_OpenOffice"/><ref name="Microoft_2000_OpenOffice"/>

==== ''SCO v. IBM'' ====

The SCO Group's 2003 lawsuit against IBM, funded by Microsoft, claiming $5 billion in [[Social:Intellectual property|intellectual property]] infringements by the free software community, is an example of FUD, according to IBM, which argued in its counterclaim that SCO was spreading "fear, uncertainty, and doubt".<ref name="Groklaw_2004_SCO-IBM-1"/>

Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells wrote (and Judge Dale Albert Kimball concurred) in her order limiting SCO's claims: "The court finds SCO's arguments unpersuasive. SCO's arguments are akin to SCO telling IBM, 'sorry, we are not going to tell you what you did wrong because you already know...' SCO was required to disclose in detail what it feels IBM misappropriated... the court finds it inexcusable that SCO is... not placing all the details on the table. Certainly if an individual were stopped and accused of shoplifting after walking out of Neiman Marcus they would expect to be eventually told what they allegedly stole. It would be absurd for an officer to tell the accused that 'you know what you stole, I'm not telling.' Or, to simply hand the accused individual a catalog of Neiman Marcus' entire inventory and say 'it's in there somewhere, you figure it out.{{'"}}<ref name="Groklaw_2004_SCO-IBM-2"/>

Regarding the matter, Darl Charles McBride, President and CEO of SCO, made the following statements:

# "IBM has taken our valuable trade secrets and given them away to Linux,"
# "We're finding... cases where there is line-by-line code in the Linux kernel that is matching up to our UnixWare code"
# "...unless more companies start licensing SCO's property... [SCO] may also sue Linus Torvalds... for patent infringement."
# "Both companies [IBM and [[Company:Red Hat|Red Hat]]] have shifted liability to the customer and then taunted us to sue them."
# "We have the ability to go to users with lawsuits and we will if we have to, 'It would be within SCO Group's rights to order every copy of [[Software:IBM AIX|AIX]] [IBM's proprietary UNIX] destroyed{{'"}}
# "As of Friday, [13] June [2003], we will be done trying to talk to IBM, and we will be talking directly to its customers and going in and auditing them. IBM no longer has the authority to sell or distribute IBM AIX and customers no longer have the right to use AIX software"
# "If you just drag this out in a typical litigation path, where it takes years and years to settle anything, and in the meantime you have all this uncertainty clouding over the market..."
# "Users are running systems that have basically pirated software inside, or stolen software inside of their systems, they have liability."<ref name="McBride_Show-Person"/>

SCO stock skyrocketed from under {{currency|amount=3|code=USD|fmt=gaps|linked=no}} a share to over {{currency|amount=20|code=USD|fmt=gaps|linked=no}} in a matter of weeks in 2003. It later dropped to around<ref name="Yahoo_SCOX"/> {{currency|amount=1.20|code=USD|fmt=gaps|linked=no}}—then crashed to under 50 cents on 13 August 2007, in the aftermath of a ruling that [[Company:Novell|Novell]] owns the UNIX [[Copyright|copyright]]s.<ref name="AT_SCOX"/>

==== Apple ====
[[Company:Apple Inc.|Apple]]'s claim that iPhone jailbreaking could potentially allow hackers to crash [[Engineering:Cell site|cell phone towers]] was described by Fred von Lohmann, a representative of the [[Organization:Electronic Frontier Foundation|Electronic Frontier Foundation]] (EFF), as a "kind of theoretical threat...more FUD than truth".<ref name="Kravets_2009_Apple"/>

=== Security industry ===
{{Main|Social:Appeal to fear}}

FUD is widely recognized as a tactic to promote the sale or implementation of security products and measures. It is possible to find pages describing purely artificial problems. Such pages frequently contain links to the demonstrating source code that does not point to any valid location and sometimes even links that "will execute malicious code on your machine regardless of current security software", leading to pages without any executable code.{{citation needed|date=December 2015}}

The drawback to the FUD tactic in this context is that, when the stated or implied threats fail to materialize over time, the customer or decision-maker frequently reacts by withdrawing budgeting or support from future security initiatives.<ref name="CXO_2003_FUD"/>

FUD has also been utilized in [[Social:Technical support scam|technical support scam]]s, which may use fake error messages to scare unwitting computer users, especially the elderly or computer-illiterate, into paying for a supposed fix for a non-existent problem,<ref name="unc_2017"/> to avoid being framed for criminal charges such as unpaid taxes, or in extreme cases, false accusations of illegal acts such as child pornography.<ref name="panorama"/>

=== Caltex ===
The FUD tactic was used by Caltex Australia in 2003. According to an internal memo, which was subsequently leaked, they wished to use FUD to destabilize franchisee confidence, and thus get a better deal for Caltex. This memo was used as an example of unconscionable behaviour in a Senate inquiry. Senior management claimed that it was contrary to and did not reflect company principles.<ref name="Lilienthal_2004_Caltex"/><ref name="ABC_2004_Caltex"/><ref name="Benns_2004_Caltex"/>

=== Clorox ===
In 2008, [[Company:Clorox|Clorox]] was the subject of both consumer and industry criticism for advertising its [[Company:Clorox#Green Works|Green Works]] line of allegedly environmentally friendly cleaning products using the slogan, "Finally, Green Works."<ref name="DeBare_2010_Clorox"/> The slogan implied both that "green" products manufactured by other companies which had been available to consumers prior to the introduction of Clorox's GreenWorks line had all been ineffective, and also that the new GreenWorks line was at least as effective as Clorox's existing product lines. The intention of this slogan and the associated advertising campaign has been interpreted as appealing to consumers' fears that products from companies with less brand recognition are less trustworthy or effective. Critics also pointed out that, despite its representation of GreenWorks products as "green" in the sense of being less harmful to the environment and/or consumers using them, the products contain a number of ingredients advocates of natural products have long campaigned against the use of in household products due to [[Medicine:Toxicity|toxicity]] to humans or their environment.<ref name="Tennery_2009_Green"/> All three implicit claims have been disputed, and some of their elements disproven, by environmental groups, consumer-protection groups, and the industry self-regulatory [[Organization:Better Business Bureau|Better Business Bureau]].<ref name="NAD_2008_Clorox"/>

== See also ==
{{Columns-list|
* {{annotated link|Agnotology}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Culture of fear}}
* {{annotated link|Unsolved:Denial and deception}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Discrediting tactic}}
* {{annotated link|Unsolved:Doubt Is Their Product|''Doubt Is Their Product''}} (book)
* {{annotated link|Philosophy:Dunning–Kruger effect}}
* {{annotated link|Embrace, extend, and extinguish}} (EEE)
* {{annotated link|Social:False flag}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Fearmongering}}
* {{annotated link|Fnord}}
* Iago – Character in ''Othello''
* {{annotated link|Earth:Merchants of Doubt|''Merchants of Doubt''}} (book)
* {{annotated link|Philosophy:Moral panic}}
* {{annotated link|Obscurantism}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Perception management}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Propaganda}}
* {{annotated link|Rational ignorance}}
* {{annotated link|Scareware}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Swiftboating}}
* {{annotated link|Engineering:Tin foil hat}}
* {{annotated link|Vaporware}}
* {{annotated link|Social:Whataboutism}}
}}

== References ==
{{Reflist|refs=
<ref name="unc_2017">{{cite web |title=Beware of tech support scams |publisher=UNC Health and UNC School of Medicine |url=http://news.unchealthcare.org/empnews/2017/july-6/beware-of-tech-support-scams |access-date=2020-03-07}}</ref>
<ref name="panorama">{{cite web |title=Spying on the Scammers |work=Panorama |publisher=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000fzx2/panorama-spying-on-the-scammers |access-date=2020-03-07}}</ref>
<ref name="Yarbrough_1920">{{cite book |author-first=Caesar Augustus |author-last=Yarbrough |title=The Roman Catholic Church Challenged in the Discussion of Thirty-two Questions with the Catholic Laymen's Association of Georgia |publisher=The Patriotic Societies of Macon |location=Macon, Georgia, USA |date=1920-05-22 |id=Cl. A570137. ark:/13960/t26982v0c |lccn=20009417 |oclc=1084527008 |chapter=Chapter: Letters from Association Answering Objections - Laymen's Repies to Criticism with the Author's Comments - Association Not Formed for Evangelical Purposes |url=https://archive.org/details/romancatholicchu00yarb |page=[https://archive.org/details/romancatholicchu00yarb/page/75 75] |quote=[…] Suspicion has no place in our interchanges; it is a shield for ignorance, a sign of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. […]}} [https://archive.org/details/romancatholicch00georgoog <!-- quote="Suspicion has no place in our interchanges; it is a shield for ignorance, a sign of fear, uncertainty, and doubt.". -->] [http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/scd0001.00173186289] (NB. In there, Yarbrough is citing a 1917-09-21 letter by J. J. Farrell, Augusta, Georgia, USA, which contains the quotation.)</ref>
<ref name="Gardner_1926">{{cite book |author-first=Monica Mary |author-last=Gardner |title=The Patriot Novelist of Poland, Henryk Sienkiewicz |editor-first=Joseph Malaby |editor-last=Dent |publisher=E. P. Dutton & Co. |date=1926 |location=London, England |page=71 |quote=[…] Again he was caught in a tempest of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. […]}} (See also: Henryk Sienkiewicz)</ref>
<ref name="Payne_1695">{{cite book |author-first=William |author-last=Payne |title=A Practical Discourse of Repentance, Rectifying the Mistakes about it, especially such as lead either to Despair or Presumption. Perswading and Directing to the True Practice of it, and Demonstrating the Invalidity of a Death-Bed Repentance. |publisher=Samuel Smith; Benjamin Walford |publication-place=The ''Princes Arms'', St. Pauls Church Yard |location=London, England |date=1695 |orig-date=1693-03-21 |edition=2nd |oclc=51617518 |chapter=Chapter VII. The Conclusion. |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YhstAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA553 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YhstAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA557 |access-date=2019-06-02 |page=557 |quote=[…] This will give unspeakable comfort peace and satisfaction to his Mind, and set him not only out of danger and free him from an ill state, but out of all doubts fears and uncertainties in his thoughts about it; […]}}</ref>
<ref name="Payne_1708">{{cite book |author-first=William |author-last=Payne |title=A Practical Discourse of Repentance, Rectifying the Mistakes about it, especially such as lead either to Despair or Presumption. Perswading and Directing to the True Practice of it, and Demonstrating the Invalidity of a Death-Bed Repentance. |publisher=Richard Burrough and John Baker; William Taylor |publication-place=The ''Sun and Moon'' (near the ''Royal Exchange''), Cornhill; the ''Ship'', St. Paul's Church-Yard |location=London, England |date=1708 |orig-date=1693-03-21 |edition=corrected and reset 2nd |oclc=1086876590 |chapter=Chapter VII. The Conclusion. |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nL0HAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA403 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nL0HAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA406 |access-date=2019-06-02 |page=406 |quote=[…] This will give unspeakable comfort peace and satisfaction to his Mind, and set him not only out of danger, and free him from an ill state, but out of all doubts fears and uncertainties in his thoughts about it; […]}}</ref>
<ref name="Clothes_1975">{{cite journal |journal=Clothes |page=19 |title=The search for self |volume=10 |issue=14–24 |publisher=PRADS, Inc. |location=New York, NY, USA |date=1975-10-01 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B8XxAAAAMAAJ&q=%22One+of+the+messages+dealt+with+is+FUD%E2%80%94the+fear%2C+uncertainty+and+doubt+on+the+part+of+customer+and+sales+person+alike+that+stifles+the+approach+and+greeting.%22 |access-date=2011-06-10 |quote=[…] One of the messages dealt with is FUD—the fear, uncertainty and doubt on the part of customer and sales person alike that stifles the approach and greeting. […]}}</ref>
<ref name="LeadRefs000">{{cite book |author-last=Harris |author-first=Rhonda |title=The Complete Sales Letter Book |publisher=Sharpe Professional |location=Armonk |date=1998 |isbn=0-7656-0083-8 |url=https://archive.org/details/completesaleslet00harr}}</ref>
<ref name="Netlingo_2002">{{cite book |author-last=Jansen |author-first=Erin |title=Netlingo |publisher=NetLingo |location=Ojai |date=2002 |isbn=0-9706396-7-8 |page=[https://archive.org/details/00book881123420/page/179 179] |url=https://archive.org/details/00book881123420/page/179}}</ref>
<ref name="JF">{{cite web |url=http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/F/FUD.html |title=FUD |work=The Jargon File |version=Version 4.4.7 |date=2003-12-29 |editor-first=Eric Steven |editor-last=Raymond |access-date=2004-03-19  |archive-date=2019-09-01  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190901221006/http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/F/FUD.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Elliott000">{{cite book |author-last=Elliott |author-first=Gail |title=School Mobbing and Emotional Abuse |publisher=Brunner–Routledge |location=Philadelphia, USA |date=2003 |isbn=0-415-94551-8 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/schoolmobbingemo0000elli }} (NB. For example, FUD has been used to describe social dynamics in contexts where sales, [[Social:Lobbying|lobbying]] or commercial promotion is not involved.)</ref>
<ref name="Irwin_1998">{{cite web |title=What is FUD? |author-last=Irwin |author-first=Roger |date=1998 |url=http://www.cavcomp.demon.co.uk/halloween/fuddef.html |access-date=2006-12-30 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190114060827/http://www.cavcomp.demon.co.uk/halloween/fuddef.html |archive-date=2019-01-14}}</ref>
<ref name="Caldera_1999_Statement_of_facts">{{cite web |title=In the United States District Court - District of Utah, Central Division - Caldera, Inc. vs. Microsoft Corporation - Consolidated statement of facts in support of its responses to motions for summary judgement by Microsoft Corporation - Case No. 2:96CV 0645B |author-first1=Stephen Daily |author-last1=Susman |author-first2=Charles R. |author-last2=Eskridge III |author-link2=Charles R. Eskridge III |author-first3=James T. |author-last3=Southwick |author-first4=Harry P. |author-last4=Susman |author-first5=Parker C. |author-last5=Folse III |author-first6=Ralph H. |author-last6=Palumbo |author-first7=Matthew R.<!-- Matt --> |author-last7=Harris |author-first8=Philip S.<!-- Phil --> |author-last8=McCune |author-first9=Lynn M. |author-last9=Engel |author-first10=Stephen J. |author-last10=Hill |author-first11=Ryan E. |author-last11=Tibbitts |date=April 1999 |type=Court document |publisher=Caldera, Inc. |url=http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/factstat.html<!-- http://www.calderathin.com/legal/index.html exact former link not known --> |access-date=2018-08-05 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180805184350/http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/factstat.html |archive-date=2018-08-05}}</ref>
<ref name="Caldera_Fullstory_Tech">{{cite web |title=In the United States District Court - District of Utah, Central Division - Caldera, Inc. vs. Microsoft Corporation - Case No. 2:96CV 0645B - Caldera, Inc.'s Memorandum in opposition to defendant's motion for partial Summary Judgment on plaintiff's "Technological Tying" claim |author-first1=Stephen Daily |author-last1=Susman |author-first2=Charles R. |author-last2=Eskridge III |author-link2=Charles R. Eskridge III |author-first3=Harry P. |author-last3=Susman |author-first4=James T. |author-last4=Southwick |author-first5=Parker C. |author-last5=Folse III |author-first6=Timothy K. |author-last6=Borchers |author-first7=Ralph H. |author-last7=Palumbo |author-first8=Matthew R.<!-- Matt --> |author-last8=Harris |author-first9=Lynn M. |author-last9=Engel |author-first10=Philip S.<!-- Phil --> |author-last10=McCune |author-first11=Lawrence C. |author-last11=Locker |author-first12=Max D. |author-last12=Wheeler |author-first13=Stephen J. |author-last13=Hill |author-first14=Ryan E. |author-last14=Tibbitts |date=May 1999 |type=Court document |publisher=Caldera, Inc. |url=http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/tech.html<!-- http://www.calderathin.com/legal/index.html exact former url not known --> |access-date=2018-08-05 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180805142843/http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/tech.html |archive-date=2018-08-05}}</ref>
<ref name="Caldera_1999_FactRel">{{cite web |title=Caldera submits evidence to counter Microsoft's motions for partial summary judgment |author-first=Lyle |author-last=Ball |publisher=Caldera, Inc. |date=1999-04-28 |type=Press release |url=http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/factrel.html<!-- http://www.calderathin.com/legal/index.html exact former url not known --> |access-date=2018-08-05 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180805143119/http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/factrel.html |archive-date=2018-08-05}}</ref>
<ref name="Schulman_1993_AARD">{{cite journal |title=Examining the Windows AARD Detection Code - A serious message--and the code that produced it |author-first=Andrew |author-last=Schulman |date=September 1993 |journal=Dr. Dobb's Journal |volume=18 |issue=9 |id=<!-- |number=-->#204 |publisher=Miller Freeman, Inc. |pages=42, 44–48, 89 |url=http://www.ddj.com/documents/s=1030/ddj9309d/9309d.htm |access-date=2013-10-05 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051210072152/http://www.ddj.com/documents/s%3D1030/ddj9309d/9309d.htm |archive-date=2005-12-10}}</ref>
<ref name="Schulman_1994_Undocumented-DOS">{{cite book |author-first1=Andrew |author-last1=Schulman |author-first2=Ralf D. |author-last2=Brown |author-first3=David |author-last3=Maxey |author-first4=Raymond J. |author-last4=Michels |author-first5=Jim |author-last5=Kyle |title=Undocumented DOS: A programmer's guide to reserved MS-DOS functions and data structures - expanded to include MS-DOS 6, Novell DOS and Windows 3.1 |publisher=Addison Wesley |edition=2 |date=1994 |orig-date=November 1993<!-- first printing --> |isbn=0-201-63287-X |location=Reading, Massachusetts |page=[https://archive.org/details/undocumenteddosp00andr_0/page/11 11] |url=https://archive.org/details/undocumenteddosp00andr_0/page/11}} (xviii+856+vi pages, 3.5-inch floppy) Errata: [https://web.archive.org/web/20190417215556/http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/ralf/pub/books/UndocumentedDOS/errata.ud2] [https://web.archive.org/web/20190417212906/https://www.pcjs.org/pubs/pc/programming/Undocumented_DOS/#errata-2nd-edition]</ref>
<ref name="Reynolds_1991">{{cite web |title=msdos detection - hot job for you |date=1993-02-24 |orig-date=1991-12-06 |author-first=Aaron R. |author-last=Reynolds |type=Court document |id=MS-PCA 1164868-1164869; X053<!-- or 9? -->2177-X053<!-- or 9? -->2178; Comes v. Microsoft Exhibit 1133; Gates Deposition Exhibit 85 |url=http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/1000/PX01133.pdf |access-date=2018-08-04 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180803194008/http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/1000/PX01133.pdf |archive-date=2018-08-03}} (NB. This court document is a copy of a mail by Aaron Reynolds written in 1991 and forwarded by one of its recipients, Phil Barrett, in 1993.)</ref>
<ref name="Lea_1999_Register">{{cite web |title=How MS played the incompatibility card against DR-DOS - Real bear-traps, and spurious errors |author-first=Graham |author-last=Lea |date=1999-11-05 |work=The Register |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_incompatibility/ |access-date=2013-09-26 |archive-date=2016-11-25  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161125041121/https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_incompatibility/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="cnet">{{cite news |author-first=Dan |author-last=Goodin |title=Microsoft emails focus on DR-DOS threat |url=http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-225129.html |work=CNET News |date=1999-04-28 |access-date=2008-08-21 |archive-date=2015-05-26  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150526200240/http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-225129.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Groklaw_2009_NovellWP">{{cite web |author-first=Pamela |author-last=Jones |title=Exhibits to Microsoft's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment in Novell WordPerfect Case |url=http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091120165256836 |work=[[Software:Groklaw|Groklaw]] |date=2009-11-23 |access-date=2011-10-22 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130821080038/http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091120165256836 |archive-date=2013-08-21}}</ref>
<ref name="Caldera_Microsoft_2000_Settlement">{{cite web |title=Settlement agreement - Microsoft Corporation and Caldera, Inc. reach agreement to settle antitrust lawsuit |author-first1=Thomas W. |author-last1=Burt |author-first2=Bryan Wayne |author-last2=Sparks |date=2000-01-07 |id=Case 1:05-cv-01087-JFM, Document 104-8, Filed 2009-11-13; NOV00107061-NOV00107071; LT2288-LT2298; Lan12S311263739.1; Exhibit A |type=Court document |url=http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/NovvMS-104-8.pdf |access-date=2018-08-03 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170704220659/http://groklaw.net/pdf2/NovvMS-104-8.pdf |archive-date=2017-07-04 |quote=[…] [[Company:Microsoft|Microsoft]] will pay to Caldera, by wire transfer in accordance with written instructions provided by Caldera, the amount of two hundred eighty million dollars ($280,000,000), as full settlement of all claims or potential claims covered by this agreement […]}} (NB. This document of the ''Caldera v. Microsoft'' case was an exhibit in the later ''Comes v. Microsoft'' case.)</ref>
<ref name="Microsoft_2009_Memorandum">{{cite web |title=Microsoft's memorandum in opposition to Novell's renewed motion for summary judgement on Microsoft's affirmative defenses and in support of Microsoft's cross-motion for summary judgement |author-first1=Richard J. |author-last1=Wallis |author-first2=Steven J. |author-last2=Aeschbacher |author-first3=Mark M. |author-last3=Bettilyon |author-first4=G. Stewar |author-last4=Webb, Jr. |author-first5=David B. |author-last5=Tulchin |author-first6=Steven L. |author-last6=Holley |date=2009-11-13 |location=United States District Court, District of Maryland |type=Court document |id=Novell, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, Civil Action No. JFM-05-1087 |page=16 |url=http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/NovvMS-104-2.pdf |access-date=2018-08-03 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190524154518/http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/NovvMS-104-2.pdf |archive-date=2019-05-24 |quote=[…] [[Company:Microsoft|Microsoft]] paid $280 million to Caldera to settle the case […]}}</ref>
<ref name="Gomes_2000_Settlement">{{cite news |title=Microsoft Will Pay $275 Million To Settle Lawsuit From Caldera |author-first=Lee |author-last=Gomes |date=2000-01-11 |newspaper={{wipe|The Wall Street Journal}} |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB947543007415899052 |access-date=2019-11-24 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161231130504/http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB947543007415899052 |archive-date=2016-12-31 |quote=Microsoft Corp. agreed to pay an estimated $275 million to settle an antitrust lawsuit by Caldera Inc., heading off a trial that was likely to air nasty allegations from a decade ago. […] Microsoft and Caldera, a small Salt Lake City software company that brought the suit in 1996, didn't disclose terms of the settlement. Microsoft, though, said it would take a charge of three cents a share for the agreement in the fiscal third quarter ending March 31 […] the company has roughly 5.5 billion shares outstanding […]}}</ref>
<ref name="ESR_Halloween">Open Source Initiative. "[http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/ Halloween I: Open Source Software (New?) Development Methodology] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171006165712/http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/ |date=2017-10-06  }}"</ref>
<ref name="Microsoft_Viral">[https://web.archive.org/web/20051211182636/http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2001/may01/05-03csm.mspx Press release from Microsoft which has viral nature of open-source quote]</ref>
<ref name="Parloff_2007_1">{{cite news |title=Microsoft takes on the free world |url=https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/ |work=Fortune |via=CNNMoney.com |author-first=Roger |author-last=Parloff |date=2007-05-14 |access-date=2007-11-04 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071109190233/https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/ |archive-date=2007-11-09}}</ref>
<ref name="Parloff_2007_2">{{cite web |title=Legal Pad, MSFT: Linux, free software, infringe 235 of our patents |url=http://legalpad.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2007/05/13/msft-linux-free-software-infringe-235-of-our-patents/ |author-first=Roger |author-last=Parloff |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081105224359/http://legalpad.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2007/05/13/msft-linux-free-software-infringe-235-of-our-patents/ |archive-date=2008-11-05}} (NB. Microsoft's licensing chief claimed that specific examples have been given in private.)</ref>
<ref name="BBC_2004_Ad">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3600724.stm |title=Microsoft's Linux ad 'misleading' |access-date=2007-07-25 |date=2004-08-26 |work=BBC News |archive-date=2008-01-10  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080110034344/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3600724.stm |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="CNET_2004_Ad">{{cite web |url=http://news.cnet.com/Ad+watchdog+warns+Microsoft+to+'Get+the+Facts'/2100-1016_3-5323672.html |title=Linux 10 times more expensive? Get the facts, watchdog tells Microsoft |access-date=2007-07-25 |date=2004-08-26 |publisher=CNet}}</ref>
<ref name="Protalinski_2000_OpenOffice">{{cite web |title=Microsoft posts video of customers criticizing OpenOffice |url=https://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/10/microsoft-posts-video-of-customers-criticizing-openoffice.ars |author-first=Emil |author-last=Protalinski |publisher=[[Ars Technica]] |date=2010 |access-date=2010-10-14 |archive-date=2021-03-20  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210320175854/https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2010/10/microsoft-posts-video-of-customers-criticizing-openoffice/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Microoft_2000_OpenOffice">{{cite web |title=Considering OpenOffice? Consider this … |publisher=[[Company:Microsoft|Microsoft]] |date=2010 |type=Video |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoZv6Gb_mYo |access-date=2019-06-17 |archive-date=2018-01-08  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180108022215/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoZv6Gb_mYo |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Groklaw_2004_SCO-IBM-1">[http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Doc-27.pdf The SCO Group v IBM – answer to amended complaint and counterclaims] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170824080530/http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Doc-27.pdf |date=2017-08-24  }} (Undecided, U.S. District Court – Utah, Kimball J., filed 2004-08-06) Section E, paragraph 22, groklaw.net</ref>
<ref name="Groklaw_2004_SCO-IBM-2">[http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060628203537917 The SCO Group v IBM – ORDER GRANTING IN PART IBM'S MOTION TO LIMIT SCO's CLAIMS] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170705004453/http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060628203537917 |date=2017-07-05  }} (Undecided, U.S. District Court – Utah, Kimball J., filed 2004-08-06) Section IV, paragraphs 33,34</ref>
<ref name="McBride_Show-Person">{{cite web |url=http://www.groklaw.net/quotes/showperson.phtml?pid=1 |title=Show Person |author-last=McBride |author-first=Darl Charles |access-date=2006-12-30 |archive-date=2013-09-05  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130905201151/http://www.groklaw.net/quotes/showperson.phtml?pid=1 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
<ref name="Yahoo_SCOX">{{cite web |url=https://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=SCOX&a=03&b=21&c=2002&d=11&e=01&f=2006&g=m |title=SCOX: Historical Prices for SCO GRP INC (THE) |work=[[Company:Yahoo!|Yahoo!]] Finance |access-date=2017-01-15  |archive-date=2006-11-10  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061110185444/http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=SCOX |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="AT_SCOX">{{cite web |url=https://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070813-investors-bailing-on-sco-stock-scox-plummets.html |title=Investors bailing on SCO stock, SCOX plummets |work=arstechnica |date=13 August 2007 |access-date=2017-06-14  |archive-date=2021-03-20  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210320175859/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/08/investors-bailing-on-sco-stock-scox-plummets/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Kravets_2009_Apple">{{cite magazine |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jailbreak/ |magazine=Wired |author-first=David |author-last=Kravets |title=iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims |date=2009-07-28 |access-date=2017-03-07  |archive-date=2014-02-10  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140210192344/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jailbreak/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="CXO_2003_FUD">{{cite web |url=http://www.csoonline.com/article/217983/The_FUD_Factor |title=The FUD Factor |work=csoonline.com |author-first=Daintry |author-last=Duffy |date=2003-04-01 |publisher=CXO Media, Inc., a subsidiary of IDG Enterprise |access-date=2008-08-20  |archive-date=2021-03-20  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210320175901/https://www.csoonline.com/article/2116419/the-fud-factor.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Lilienthal_2004_Caltex">{{cite news |author-first=Hayden |author-last=Lilienthal |title=New deal helps to heal Caltex wounds |url=http://www.energynewspremium.net/storyview.asp?storyid=24662&sectionsource=s0 |work=EnergyNewsPremium |date=2004-04-28 |access-date=2014-12-05  |archive-date=2014-12-09  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141209082650/http://www.energynewspremium.net/storyview.asp?storyid=24662&sectionsource=s0 |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="ABC_2004_Caltex">{{cite news |title=Caltex 'bully' memo breached policy |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2004-04-23/caltex-bully-memo-breached-policy/174892 |work=ABC |date=2004-04-23 |access-date=2014-12-05  |archive-date=2016-10-27  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161027201456/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2004-04-23/caltex-bully-memo-breached-policy/174892 |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="Benns_2004_Caltex">{{cite news |author-last=Benns |author-first=Matthew |title=Caltex in court over Woolies deal |url=http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/03/1072908952947.html |work=Sydney Morning Herald |date=2004-01-04 |access-date=2014-12-05  |archive-date=2021-03-20  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210320175836/https://www.smh.com.au/national/caltex-in-court-over-woolies-deal-20040104-gdi3ft.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref name="DeBare_2010_Clorox">{{cite news |url=http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-01-14/news/17149716_1_natural-cleaning-cleaning-products-green-works/3 |title=Clorox introduces green line of cleaning products |author-last=DeBare |author-first=Ilana |date=2008-01-14 |work=SFGate |access-date=2010-02-05}}{{Dead link|date=October 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes}}</ref>
<ref name="Tennery_2009_Green">{{cite web |url=http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/4-green-claims-to-be-wary-of.aspx |title=4 'green' claims to be wary of |author-last=Tennery |author-first=Amy |date=2009-04-22 |publisher=[[Software:MSN|MSN]] |access-date=2010-02-05 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111122220336/http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/4-green-claims-to-be-wary-of.aspx |archive-date=2011-11-22}}</ref>
<ref name="NAD_2008_Clorox">{{cite web |url=http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/17/nad-tells-clorox-to-clean-up-ads/ |title=NAD Tells Clorox to Clean Up Ads |date=2008-08-17 |work=Environmental Leader |access-date=2010-02-05 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100209014540/http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/08/17/nad-tells-clorox-to-clean-up-ads/ |archive-date=2010-02-09}}</ref>
}}

== Further reading ==
* {{cite web |url=http://opensource.com/business/10/3/dont-let-fud-kill-your-business-goals |title=Don't let FUD kill your business goals |date=2000-04-19 |author-first=Rebecca |author-last=Fernandez |location=[[Company:Red Hat|Red Hat]] |website=opensource.com}}
* {{cite web |url=http://www.pro-linux.de/news/2007/11079.html |title=Microsoft: Mit Patenten gegen Open Source |language=de |date=2007-04-15 |author-first=Mirko |author-last=Lindner |work={{ill|Pro-Linux|de}}}}
* {{cite journal |author-first1=Jonathan Michael |author-last1=Samet |author-first2=Alistair |author-last2=Woodward |title=National Government Denial of Climate Change and State and Local Public Health Action in a Federalist System |journal=American Journal of Public Health |volume=108 |number=S2 |date=2018-04-26 |orig-date=2018-02-16 |pages=S112– |doi=10.2105/AJPH.2018.304395 |pmid=29698096 |pmc=5922214}}

== External links ==
* {{cite web |url=http://www.wyonapictures.com/en/fud/index.html |title=FUD - Fear Uncertainty Doubt |date=2005 |type=documentary film |author-first=Michael |author-last=Wechner |work=wyona pictures}}

{{JargonFile}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Fear, Uncertainty And Doubt}}
[[Category:Computer jargon]]
[[Category:Marketing techniques]]
[[Category:Propaganda techniques]]

{{Sourceattribution|Fear, uncertainty, and doubt}}