I am not a patent lawyer. I know how long a patent lasts and some other details typical of many non-patent lawyers and lay inventors, but I'm not expert. But, I still say that when the law permits an injunction to issue based upon patents that are very likely invalid (in one case, finally so found by the PTO and in four other cases, preliminarily so found), as is the case in the Blackberry case, that something is deeply wrong with the law.
I also think that the maker of Blackberry should be able to seek restitution of amounts it has paid, if any, to the firm that won patent claims against it, when those patents are invalidated.
Finality can go too far. It is unconscionable to have laws that keep the innocent in prison, and it is unconscionable to allow the results of a civil action that found a violation of a patent to stand, if that patent is indeed, found to be invalid.