Except that VP9 isn't patent-free. MPEG LA and other patent holders simply haven't bothered to flex their muscles because VP9 adoption is pretty much non-existant.
That's why I much prefer H.265. It is a defacto standard.
> In March 2013, MPEG LA announced that it had dropped its effort to form a VP8 patent pool after reaching an agreement with Google to license the patents that it alleges "may be essential" for VP8 implementation, and granted Google the right to sub-license these patents to any third-party user of VP8 or VP9.[26][27] This deal has cleared the way for possible MPEG standardisation as its royalty-free internet video codec, after Google submitted VP8 to the MPEG committee in January 2013.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. MPEG LA sue Google for a technology invented/bought(and patented) by Google? Is that it? I think I need more details to understand what you truly mean.
> In March 2013, MPEG LA announced that it had dropped its effort to form a VP8 patent pool after reaching an agreement with Google to license the patents that it alleges "may be essential" for VP8 implementation, and granted Google the right to sub-license these patents to any third-party user of VP8 or VP9.[26][27] This deal has cleared the way for possible MPEG standardisation as its royalty-free internet video codec, after Google submitted VP8 to the MPEG committee in January 2013.