``And the company agreed to pay Creative Technologies (CREAF - commentary - Cramer`s Take) $100 million to settle a patent dispute, essentially -- if not technically -- admitting that it had illegitimately borrowed some of Creative`s ideas in designing the iPod`s interface.

But PR -- not to mention $100 million -- isn`t everything.

When compared with the way other notable patent disputes have gone of late, Apple`s settlement with Creative starts to look like one of the best ways to handle a bad situation: Faced with a serious threat to a core product, you get your lawyers on the phone with the other guy`s lawyers, you throw some money at the problem, and you settle it -- and make it go away.

And you get bonus points if, like Apple, you can turn your potential courtroom opponent into a business partner and give yourself a chance to recoup some of your settlement costs.

``This is a smart move for Apple,`` says Scott Marrs, a patent attorney for Houston, Texas-based Beirne, Maynard & Parsons. ``Someone really took a hard look at this -- and appropriately so -- and said, `Let`s focus on our future business.` ``