I wouldn't support that "fine" because that's not the law. There is no fine in patent cases. Instead, Apple would have to pay damages to Nokia. The amount of the damages would be determined based on the law. In this case, the damages would most likely be whatever the court finds to be the "fair reasonable and non-discriminatory" royalty rate, which certainly would be less than Apple's profits. Alternately the court might find that a so-called "reasonable royalty" is the proper amount. A reasonable royalty would also be far less than Apple's profits. This is not because I am an Apple fan or something - I'm simply stating what the law is.
Your argument of "if apple loses they shouldn't have been selling..." is specious. That's not the way patent law works. If apple loses, they should pay damages, and at that point the court may or may not order an injunction. Much like contract breach, there is no criminal component or "penalty" for patent infringement. This differs from copyright infringement. In copyright infringement you can be penalized above and beyond the damages you caused, including jail time. Unless apple is found to have "willfully infringed" they won't even have to pay treble damages. And since Nokia hasn't asked for a preliminary injunction, under the precedent of In re Seagate there won't be willfulness damages. (Apple certainly had already obtained opinion of counsel, in any case, which would almost certainly have prevented such damages - in other words, lawyers wrote a formal opinion explaining that the nokia patents were invalid or unenforceable or not infringed, and Apple in good faith relied on this opinion).
