Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies In the ordinary course of business, we are involved in various pending and threatened litigation and regulatory matters related to our operations, such as claims brought by our clients in connection with commercial disputes, defamation claims by subjects of our reporting, and employment claims made by our current or former employees, some of which include claims for punitive or exemplary damages. Our ordinary course litigation may also include class action lawsuits, which make allegations related to various aspects of our business. From time to time, we are also subject to regulatory investigations or other proceedings by state and federal regulatory authorities as well as authorities outside of the U.S., some of which take the form of civil investigative demands or subpoenas. Some of these regulatory inquiries may result in the assessment of fines for violations of regulations or settlements with such authorities requiring a variety of remedies. We believe that none of these actions depart from customary litigation or regulatory inquiries incidental to our business. We review lawsuits and other legal and regulatory matters (collectively "legal proceedings") on an ongoing basis when making accrual and disclosure decisions. When assessing reasonably possible and probable outcomes, management bases its decision on its assessment of the ultimate outcome assuming all appeals have been exhausted. For legal proceedings where it has been determined that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, a liability based on known facts and which represents our best estimate has been recorded. Actual losses may materially differ from the amounts recorded and the ultimate outcome of our pending cases is generally not yet determinable. While some of these matters could be material to our operating results or cash flows for any particular period if an unfavorable outcome results, at present we do not believe the ultimate resolution of currently pending legal proceedings, either individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. In addition, in the normal course of business, and including without limitation, our merger and acquisition activities, strategic relationships and financing transactions, the Company indemnifies other parties, including clients, lessors and parties to other transactions with the Company, with respect to certain matters. We have agreed to hold the other parties harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or arising out of other claims made against certain parties. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. The Company has also entered into indemnity obligations with its officers and directors. Federal Trade Commission Consent Agreement On April 10, 2018, the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC” or the "Commission") issued a Civil Investigative Demand (“CID”) to Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (“D&B Inc.,” a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company) related to an investigation by the FTC into potential violations of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (the “FTC Act”), primarily concerning our credit managing and monitoring products such as CreditBuilder. D&B Inc. completed its response to the CID in November 2018. On May 28, 2019, the FTC staff informed D&B Inc. that it believes that certain of D&B's practices violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, and informed D&B Inc. that it had been given authority by the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection to engage in consent negotiations. Following discussions between the Company and the FTC staff, on September 9, 2019, the FTC issued a second CID seeking additional information, data and documents. The Company completed its response to the second CID in April 2020. In a letter dated March 2, 2020, the FTC staff identified areas of interest related to the CIDs and we completed our responses to the letter on April 7, 2020. On April 20, 2020, the FTC and D&B Inc. entered a tolling agreement with respect to potential claims related to the subject matter of the investigation. On February 23, 2021, the FTC staff provided D&B Inc. with a draft complaint and consent order outlining its allegations and the forms of relief sought, and advised that it had been given authority to engage in consent negotiations. Following consent negotiations, on September 21, 2021, D&B Inc. agreed to enter into an Agreement Containing Consent Order ("Consent Agreement"). On January 13, 2022, the FTC informed the Company that the Commission had voted to accept the Consent Agreement. On January 19, 2022, the Consent Agreement was published in the Federal Register, triggering a 30-day public comment period that ended on February 18, 2022. On April 6, 2022, the Commission finalized approval of the Consent Agreement. On May 27, 2022, the Company completed sending notices and refund checks required by the Consent Agreement. Current refund-eligible customers had 30 days from the date of their notice (or, in the event of returned mail, the date of the remailed notice) to elect a refund, and the Company can void any uncashed checks after 187 days. In accordance with ASC 450, an accrual in respect to this matter was included in the consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021. The amount of any loss has not been fully determined. Right of Publicity Class Actions DeBose v. Dun & Bradstreet Holdings, Inc., No. 2:22-cv-00209-ES-CLW (D.N.J.) On January 17, 2022, Plaintiff Rashad DeBose filed a Class Action Complaint against the Company, alleging that the Company used the purported class members’ names and personas to promote paid subscriptions to the Company’s Hoovers product website without consent, in violation of the Ohio right of publicity statute and Ohio common law prohibiting misappropriation of a name or likeness. On March 30, 2022, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint. The motion has been fully briefed, but the Court has not yet set a date for oral argument. Discovery has commenced, but it is in its early stages. In accordance with ASC 450 Contingencies, as the Company is in the very early stage of investigating the claims and is still evaluating the claims and its defenses, we therefore have no basis to determine that a loss in connection with this matter is probable, reasonably possible or estimable, and thus no reserve has been established nor has a range of loss been disclosed. While this matter is in a very early stage, as it is a potential class action, in an abundance of caution, we have included it in our public filings. Batis v. Dun & Bradstreet Holdings, Inc., No. 4:22-cv-01924-AGT (N.D.Cal.) On March 25, 2022, Plaintiff Odette R. Batis filed a Class Action Complaint against the Company, alleging that the Company used the purported class members’ names and personas to promote paid subscriptions to the Company’s Hoovers product website without consent, in violation of the California right of publicity statute, California common law prohibiting misappropriation of a name or likeness and California’s Unfair Competition Law. On June 30, 2022, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP statute. In accordance with ASC 450 Contingencies, as the Company is in the very early stage of investigating the claims and is still evaluating the claims and its defenses, we therefore have no basis to determine that a loss in connection with this matter is probable, reasonably possible or estimable, and thus no reserve has been established nor has a range of loss been disclosed. While this matter is in a very early stage, as it is a potential class action, in an abundance of caution, we have included it in our public filings.

We review lawsuits and other legal and regulatory matters (collectively "legal proceedings") on an ongoing basis when making accrual and disclosure decisions. When assessing reasonably possible and probable outcomes, management bases its decision on its assessment of the ultimate outcome assuming all appeals have been exhausted. For legal proceedings where it has been determined that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, a liability based on known facts and which represents our best estimate has been recorded. Actual losses may materially differ from the amounts recorded and the ultimate outcome of our pending cases is generally not yet determinable.

In addition, in the normal course of business, and including without limitation, our merger and acquisition activities, strategic relationships and financing transactions, the Company indemnifies other parties, including clients, lessors and parties to other transactions with the Company, with respect to certain matters. We have agreed to hold the other parties harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or arising out of other claims made against certain parties. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. The Company has also entered into indemnity obligations with its officers and directors.

On April 10, 2018, the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC” or the "Commission") issued a Civil Investigative Demand (“CID”) to Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (“D&B Inc.,” a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company) related to an investigation by the FTC into potential violations of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (the “FTC Act”), primarily concerning our credit managing and monitoring products such as CreditBuilder. D&B Inc. completed its response to the CID in November 2018. On May 28, 2019, the FTC staff informed D&B Inc. that it believes that certain of D&B's practices violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, and informed D&B Inc. that it had been given authority by the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection to engage in consent negotiations. Following discussions between the Company and the FTC staff, on September 9, 2019, the FTC issued a second CID seeking additional information, data and documents. The Company completed its response to the second CID in April 2020. In a letter dated March 2, 2020, the FTC staff identified areas of interest related to the CIDs and we completed our responses to the letter on April 7, 2020. On April 20, 2020, the FTC and D&B Inc. entered a tolling agreement with respect to potential claims related to the subject matter of the investigation. On February 23, 2021, the FTC staff provided D&B Inc. with a draft complaint and consent order outlining its allegations and the forms of relief sought, and advised that it had been given authority to engage in consent negotiations. Following consent negotiations, on September 21, 2021, D&B Inc. agreed to enter into an Agreement Containing Consent Order ("Consent Agreement"). On January 13, 2022, the FTC informed the Company that the Commission had voted to accept the Consent Agreement. On January 19, 2022, the Consent Agreement was published in the Federal Register, triggering a 30-day public comment period that ended on February 18, 2022. On April 6, 2022, the Commission finalized approval of the Consent Agreement. On May 27, 2022, the Company completed sending notices and refund checks required by the Consent Agreement. Current refund-eligible customers had 30 days from the date of their notice (or, in the event of returned mail, the date of the remailed notice) to elect a refund, and the Company can void any uncashed checks after 187 days.

On January 17, 2022, Plaintiff Rashad DeBose filed a Class Action Complaint against the Company, alleging that the Company used the purported class members’ names and personas to promote paid subscriptions to the Company’s Hoovers product website without consent, in violation of the Ohio right of publicity statute and Ohio common law prohibiting misappropriation of a name or likeness. On March 30, 2022, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint. The motion has been fully briefed, but the Court has not yet set a date for oral argument. Discovery has commenced, but it is in its early stages.

On March 25, 2022, Plaintiff Odette R. Batis filed a Class Action Complaint against the Company, alleging that the Company used the purported class members’ names and personas to promote paid subscriptions to the Company’s Hoovers product website without consent, in violation of the California right of publicity statute, California common law prohibiting misappropriation of a name or likeness and California’s Unfair Competition Law. On June 30, 2022, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP statute.