Relevant yes, but in this case the requirement for a new standard doesn't arise from vanity or "more use cases", but rather from the fact that video compression is a patent minefield.

Situation: there are 0 free and libre state-of-art video codecs; Xiph is working on one supported by Red Hat and Mozilla.

Mozilla buys Monty Montgomery from Red Hat.

Soon: Situation: there are 0 free and libre state-of-art video codecs; Xiph is working on one supported by Red Hat and Mozilla.

... very relevant.

How are VP8/VP9 (webm) not 'free and libre'?

As I understand, Google can go evil and use its patents to impose certain restrictions, like killing potential independent VP10 project or messing with webm's royalty-free status.

Since Google are offering them under a _irrevocable_ royalty free licence I don't see how you could have come to 'understand' it that way.

Do you have any references to your claims?

Citation?

Actually, those fail the "state-of-the-art" part of the test.