That's quite a creative interpretation of the source you cited - let's see what was actually reported there:
One could just as easily surmise that Apple wanted extra stuff and refused to pay for any of it, and wouldn't give anything back in return.
In all fairness, nothing in that story makes it possible for anyone to know who's the "bad guy" here, or if there even is one at all.
As we move forward with what is likely to be even more uninformed finger wagging, consider the opening story here about the time Steve Jobs willfully violated a contract and incurred a lawsuit for Apple to spite a vendor before attempting to prematurely reach any sort of verdict on Apple's relations with Google:
I believe I represented the interpretation from Apple's perspective. I didn't mean to imply it was the ONLY interpretation. But let's face it: Apple does not hand control over to competitors.
My point was that things have changed since the video you posted was released. The article explains how things have changed for both Google and Apple. Any article can be interpreted many ways, and I don't recall wagging a finger, but I don't believe the level of integration and control Google wanted is something Apple would ever agree to.
You also get creative by assuming that this had anything to do with Apple being unwilling to pay. The article doesn't mention money being an issue. It mentions control. For all we know Apple offered mounds of cash to keep control, but Google preferred control and integration over money.
We can debate this all day but the main point is Apple and Google both wanted to changes and they couldn't come to terms.
Google had every right to request more in return for Navigation.
Apple had every right to reject what they asked for.
Who is to blame? Honestly probably both of them.