Not quite correct. Apple published the apology, but quoted the judge's decision that "Samsung's products couldn't possibly infringe Apple's patents because they aren't as cool" in the apology. The judge felt that was not cricket, and demanded Apple re-apologize without citing the reason for the apology, or the decision. Apple appealed, stating they merely published the truth as stated by the justice. Apparently that is considered "cheeky." The Appeals Court punished them for the audacity of telling the truth. . . and citing the court's decision. The law is now devolved to the rule of men, not law.
Judges, they live in a buyers market, everywhere. If he didn't like the quote, he shouldn't have included it in his ruling.
Hmmm, that information wasn't in the linked article, or at least I didn't find it. Do you have a link for that apology statement. Sounds like Apple pissed the judge personally. Generally not a good idea. Wouldn't be the first time a judge exacted a little retribution, not saying that it's correct, but they are human and human nature being what it is...