A new study released by an international coalition of experts calls upon governments across the world to consider a massive restructuring of intellectual property laws.

The report was released in September by members of the International Expert Group on Biotechnology, Innovation and IP, a group chaired by McGill University’s Prof. Richard Gold.

Titled Toward a New Era of Intellectual Property: From Confrontation to Negotiation, the report outlines a number of strategies for governments, universities and industry players to increase innovation, which Gold believes has long been stifled by IP laws. Among these is a call to governments to work with industry in creating respected and trusted entities whose members can be counted on to mediate disputes fairly and encourage indigenous and local communities in policy development. For patent offices to collect standardized patent-related information, and for universities to develop measures of the success of transfer of technology based on social returns rather than on the sheer number of patents held. Industry entities are also encouraged to participate actively in the creation of public-private partnerships and other collaborative mechanisms.

Based on seven years of research involving case studies from Brazil, Canada, Kenya, the United States, the European Union, Japan, Australia and India, as well as discussions with policymakers, industry representatives, scientists and academics from around the world, the report found consistent roadblocks around the globe.

“We found the same stumbling blocks in the traditional communities of Brazil as we did in the boardroom of a corporation that holds the patent to a gene that can determine the chance a woman will develop breast cancer,” said Gold. “No matter where we looked, the lack of trust played a vital role in blocking negotiations that could have benefited both sides, as well as the larger public.”

Information was gathered through group sessions in which former industry competitors were allowed to sit and speak with each other, revealing information that made clear to both sides the reasons for their inability to find common ground.

The report highlights recent examples of patents and privatelycontrolled research limiting potential innovation—the $612 million patent suit that nearly shut down the World’s Blackberries;Myriad Genetics’ inability to introduce its breast cancer screening test in Canada and Europe; a pharmaceutical industry with an increasingly bare medicine cabinet; an ongoing failure to deliver life-saving medications to developing countries.

As with any fringe technology, biotechnology suffers greatly from vague, out-of-date and almost obstructive IP laws, according to Gold.The industry itself, he believes,must be the primary agent of change.

“Law deals with technology that we had 5 to 10 years ago,” said Gold. “To get things to happen you really have to change the minds of the people actually doing the research.We’re in ruts of thinking. For any biotech to say ‘the old model doesn’t work, we’re going to go out on a limb here and come up with something new’, they’re afraid nobody’s going to back them. We all know the model doesn’t work, nobody is taking the first step to move it forward.”