I think that licensing is not an issue here. I guess we are talking about "capturing", "producing" and "delivering" video contents to our audience. Some of the debate is also because of confusion related to "shutter speed" and "frame rate".
The target users of these cameras are average amateurs and 30p matches their needs for capturing, producing and viewing the contents they create and the results can be viewed on any available 60Hz TV set produced since 2006 without any trouble and jitters.
Even advanced users who may want to use the 24p production workflow for editing and delivering contents (e.g. those who still produce DVDs or Blu-rays for their clients) are ok because 24p is the least denominator of the frame rates and any scene recorded in 30, 60 or 120p can be added to the timeline automatically in most common NLEs (Premiere, Resolve, etc.), either with its actual or stretched (slow motion) timeline without loss in quality. However, the opposite is not true, e.g. if you record 24p and want to add to a 30p timeline you will get additional artifacts and jitters. The conclusion is that 30p does not really affect the capturing and producing steps.
As for shutter speed, people care about it (i.e. faster shutter speed reduces motion blur) and we are good at noticing it and picking it up but we usually don't notice the frame-rate that well. The remaining issue is that the 24p frame rate's "feel and look" is different than 25p, 30p or 60p. That is a matter of taste, tradition or even the bragging rights, something similar to the Bokeh debate, I guess. Average users don't know or care.