..I'm with you on the "evil" part. But unless you've been involved with development of a complex product, you might not realize that it is almost impossible to develop a complex product without inadvertently violating some existing patent.
And that's exactly the distinction that's often present between those companies who willfully and blatantly copy IP, and those who do due diligence, but miss an obscure existing patent. We can suspect which companies generally fall within which category, but without proof, it shouldn't make people go around proclaiming such suspicions as the gospel, with it's inevitable good-vs-evil labeling.
Which is what I believe samcraig below, was alluding to.
I love the comments about how this is pocket change to Apple. While true - it's still a win for the plaintiff. But it seems people are fine with Apple violating patents and how insignificant any judgement is but when it comes to Apple suing others for their patents every other company is evil for violating them. The hypocrisy is laughable.
Apple has been found to have infringed upon an existing patent, and ordered to pay a damages judgement for that violation. End of story, hopefully.