"In agreement with the court ruling Apple acknowledges Samsung hasn't copied the design of the iPad. As the judge stated Samsung products lack the simplicity of the iPad."
Might get them in bother mind, but if a judge is willing to say your product is much cooler in a court of law, on the record no less, you may as well take what you can.
I think their marketing guys are going to have a feast on this. They could start playing around the lines: Samsung tablets are not as cool or simple as ours. Sorry for taking this too far intend of working on cool stuff for you — our lawyers are design challenged.
It wasn't a "bailout" it was a legal settlement.
Edit: http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2009/08/dayintech_0806/
That investment was (in part, along with a cash settlement) the resultion of a dispute over Microsoft using Quicktime code in their Video for Windows product.
If it were a "settlement", it would have happened in the court room. Apple surrendered the case just to stay alive.
The court ruled no such thing. "[The case] is not about whether Samsung copied Apple's iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design..."
Someone said it'll be interesting to see what Samsung's lawyers let Apple get away with but I'm not sure how they can object to Apple quoting what the judge actually said in his judgement.