"If online videos were subject to patent licensing fees, users could be charged per-view to capture those fees. […] video licensing could reduce the democratic nature of free and open Internet content to monetizable media. The funny cat videos would be gone forever (perhaps not the greatest loss), but so too would the movement-inspiring Nedas of the future remain unknown. […] As the Web incorporates multimedia, some participants want to control — and charge for — its video standards. […] Some participants in the online video discussion claim that common video codecs […] cannot be implemented without infringing their patents. One codec under popular consideration for use in HTML5 is H.264 (a.k.a. MPEG-4 AVC), already used for an estimated 66% of all online video content, including Hulu and YouTube. Yet H.264 is also claimed to be subject to a pool of patents controlled by MPEG-LA, a limited liability corporation that describes itself as the "world’s leading packager of patent pools for standards and other technology platforms.""