[zts]

While I admit to only skimming that link, all the examples I read discussed a single company tying purchase of one of their products to one of their other products.

Apple does not sell DUNS numbers, as they are not Dun & Bradstreet.

It also mentioned the anticompetitive nature of tying a weak/new product to a stronger one. DUNS numbers are not new or esoteric (although I do think of them as being old-fashioned and enterprisey).

So, I struggle with the notion that this could be illegal, but I'd be fascinated to learn more about it.

Sure is developer hostile and counter-productive, though.

[eduardordm]

Tying is illegal in the US. The question is 'is that tying?'.

The answer is: yes. The only way this is not tying is by bundling the service: apple would provide the number for you without charging.

But then, D&B competitors could say this is a trust case.

To really solve this apple must offer a list of companies that offer the solution for whatever numbering problem they seem to have. Or just drop the requirement.

[jonhendry]

Apple can't provide the number. It's not their database.

The number itself isn't the issue, it's what it represents: that your business is recorded in a large and reputable database of international businesses that is in widespread use by companies and governments.

[eduardordm]

D&B database is widespread in the US, not internationally. In fact, I own a credit card company/bank and never heard of them until I needed their number. Their database is large because they are filling it, not because companies request.

In fact, S&P and Moody's are the only ratings/registry that can get you anywhere in the banking system.