Not among the powerful, no. The public gets great benefit from FLOSS codecs (Opus, VPx, AV1, etc.) and containers anyone is free to implement without patent hassles (such as Matroska and the smaller variant used in WebM). Patent holders usually try to wrangle control of everyone (Apple being a part of a media codec patent-holding group meant Apple pushed those codecs and back when people cared what Apple picked that meant more power for Apple). In this respect, it's a class issue.
In 1990 IBM (in "Think" magazine, #5) said they got considerably more value from cross-licensing than fees (in other words, looking at this in terms of money is wrongheaded) because cross-licensing gives them access to ideas). So, it's the power to control one's competition at play as well. This arrangement means (as Richard Stallman pointed out in essays and talks years ago found online in https://audio-video.gnu.org/video/rms-vub-2011-02-22.ogv ) that the entire temporary monopoly one ostensibly gets from the patent system is a sham, a myth. Organizations that hold a lot of patents can always find ways to economically compel smaller patent holders into cross-licensing, thus eliminating any real value of patenting ideas for most.
In 1990 IBM (in "Think" magazine, #5) said they got considerably more value from cross-licensing than fees (in other words, looking at this in terms of money is wrongheaded) because cross-licensing gives them access to ideas). So, it's the power to control one's competition at play as well. This arrangement means (as Richard Stallman pointed out in essays and talks years ago found online in https://audio-video.gnu.org/video/rms-vub-2011-02-22.ogv ) that the entire temporary monopoly one ostensibly gets from the patent system is a sham, a myth. Organizations that hold a lot of patents can always find ways to economically compel smaller patent holders into cross-licensing, thus eliminating any real value of patenting ideas for most.