The classical ethical and pragmatic dilemma of intellectual rights vs. copying essential medicines doesn't even apply here. Yes, of course we can consider the moral right of various groups to steal IPR in order to save lives. We can even reframe the topic in a more abstract discussion regarding the right of the government to nationalize private property, which is in our case IPR - and when nationalization (or expropriation) becomes theft.
But we are taking here about a lot of public funding. US, Germany, UK, the European Commission pushed billions into research for a new Covid vaccine. Tax money.
Was it right for the state to intervene in the regulation of banks and their directors' bonuses in the 2009 crisis? Well, yes, when the state saved these banks and pushed billions to get them back on track, then the state has become the main stakeholder but also main shareholder, so it has the right and the moral obligation to have a say in how this money is spent (nb. the state is of course, here, a proxy for society).
Same for pharma. When the research of this vaccine was funded by public money, subsidized by the taxes of hundreds of millions of people in rich countries, then these people, including we Europeans, have the moral right to influence what we do with the results. So the question boils down to: are we all of us humane or selfish enough to (not) share the results with countries that didn't have money for grants to research and the pharmaceutical industry? As all EU countries will benefit from the European Union funding and purchasing power, wouldn't it be nice for the whole world to benefit?
Me, I am voting for making the Covid vaccine open-source.
Note: the vaccine developed by Pfizer and Biotech is closer to public large scale distribution. Picture (c) Reuters, news here.