The assumption is that it allows detection of the installation of the virus via a web-browser.

http://blog.crysys.hu/2012/08/on-the-palida-narrow-mystery-of-gauss-malware-and-possible-remote-detection/

As the virus seems to be only installed on certain machines with known paths, and those paths can be exposed through Microsoft Office document files, it is possible that whoever targeted this attack had received a MS Office document, that told them who to target. I would not be entirely surprised if the font was used to detect installation on the target PC through either the virus using it in a office document as a file - or possibly even through printed material generated by the target machine.

Here is a simple explanation of why the Judge has ordered this:

1) You are allowed to claim anything you like in a court of law and you can't be sued for slander, defamation, libel etc. as otherwise the legal system would be completely broken.

2) Journalists are allowed to report anything they like and they can't be used for slander, defamation, libel etc. as otherwise freedom of the press would be completely broken.

3) Oracle appears to have paid 'journalists' to repeat the claims made in court as fact. Because those claims are now being made outside of court, they don't have the courts protection against being sued. Because the 'journalist' is acting as a paid agent of Oracle they are no longer protected by freedom of the press.

So this isn't a first amendment issue - this is just a did Oracle pay someone to defame Google issue.

Click on the Pearly "Gates" to access the Cloud.

Is that Melinda wearing a "pearl necklace"?

3. Now that we've had our daily Microsoft-is-the-stupidest-and-evilest-company-on-the-planet-for-not-accurately-predicting-an-arbitrary-holiday-date-change-years-in-advance post, I'd like to see some more stories about how Americans are stupid and evil and some scientific studies showing that Christians are genetically inferior to the Atheist master race.

Too much work. Can't we just bitch about the /. "editors"?

Competitors are still allowed to bid on other companies trademarked names - it's just that the link can't be deceptive.

e.g. Toyota could bid on keywords like 'ford truck' to have one of Toyota's ads come up.

What they can't do is have the ad say 'Hot deals on Ford F-150 trucks' and then have it link through to a site that only sells Toyota trucks, as that is a deceptive advert.