What would cost millions of dollars? Please cut the drama out already and limit yourself to arguments. You're finally starting to display understanding of the patent clause.
Companies wouldn't adopt things under "GPLv3", but they wouldn't a permit GPLv2 either. Or LPGL. Or Apache 2. Or MIT, or BSD, or any license. They permit nothing short of contributors assigning them copyright and the patents, just them (see eg. Webkit's and Chromium's copyright notices and CLAs). And yet, libpng is under a license. So yeah, I agree they'd write their own library - out of their selfishness. Let them.
With the "adopting a web standard" thing you're attempting to further move goal posts. But you fail, and not because your implication that standard bodies would accept permissive licenses is wrong - which it is, because they're exclusively public domain + patent clause (oh and the people building browsers still contribute somehow). You fail because you're mixing apples and oranges again; programs are not parts of standards. Standards describe file formats, and prescribe behavior of programs that process them. They are not concerned with implementations' licenses.
The spec can become a public domain standard, and all would still be well with the library under (L)GPLv3+. Free software should have the edge.
Companies wouldn't adopt things under "GPLv3", but they wouldn't a permit GPLv2 either. Or LPGL. Or Apache 2. Or MIT, or BSD, or any license. They permit nothing short of contributors assigning them copyright and the patents, just them (see eg. Webkit's and Chromium's copyright notices and CLAs). And yet, libpng is under a license. So yeah, I agree they'd write their own library - out of their selfishness. Let them.
With the "adopting a web standard" thing you're attempting to further move goal posts. But you fail, and not because your implication that standard bodies would accept permissive licenses is wrong - which it is, because they're exclusively public domain + patent clause (oh and the people building browsers still contribute somehow). You fail because you're mixing apples and oranges again; programs are not parts of standards. Standards describe file formats, and prescribe behavior of programs that process them. They are not concerned with implementations' licenses.
The spec can become a public domain standard, and all would still be well with the library under (L)GPLv3+. Free software should have the edge.