it's very clear that patents and IP rights generally are behind the whole problem
I wouldn't be so sure in this case. The Saudi official who has been complaining the loudest admitted (to a journalist who actually bothered to ask pointed questions) that the Dutch claim hasn't actually held up research in Saudi Arabia. He also admitted that the most bothersome aspect of this mess wasn't the lack of access, it was the fact that the Dutch were even claiming commercial rights that should have belonged exclusively to Saudi Arabia. (And I agree to the extent that the Dutch are behaving somewhat unethically here.)
As I've pointed out elsewhere in this thread, an MTA of some sort is standard practice, and in this case, where the material is a known human pathogen, some legal documentation and waiver of liability is absolutely essential. Even more so when the sample is being distributed internationally. Any researcher who would send a virus like this to a lab in another country without some kind of legally binding agreement should be fired for incompetence. Whether IP rights are involved or not does not affect this.
I think it's only a matter of time before biotech patents really do start to inhibit potentially life-saving research; I've seen it argued that personal genomics research is essentially violating gene patents in bulk, because that's the only way they can do any research at all! If our ability to get diagnostics from genome sequencing were held up by patents, or (more likely) if the $1000 genome became a $10,000 genome again because of all of the licensing fees, that would be genuinely tragic. But I think this case is simply a multi-national spat over IP rights; it has nothing to do with actually curing the disease.