But they also have a BBC Micro lab, complete with a Domesday Disc setup. Which you can play with. It's surprisingly usable.
The laser discs themselves were a bit like gold disc LP records - 12" sized and expensive looking. I believe there were video games in arcades that had the same technology going on with moving pictures rather than still frames.
As a whole though the Domesday content was a bit like Encarta and other multimedia CDs that came out when CD-ROM was a thing. Much like Encarta et al., one felt slightly disappointed at the lack of depth to the knowledge/information provided, thank goodness Wikipedia took off.
Back in around 2005 I contacted the original project leader to see if we could somehow help with the preservation, but at that time it was thought sorting through the copyright issues would make it impossible. I was happy to see it was eventually released online!
Long term archival was a concern for Geograph - aside from adopting a cc-by-sa licence on image submissions, we also worked with the National Archives to ensure a digital copy of the image archive is preserved.
The Domesday project occupies what seems now - the briefest window of opportunity - to create something that would become obsolescent so quickly! But I think its true value lies in acting as a warning to others...
Same here. It was my BBC micro we used to enter the data for our village (Blackford). I never ever saw the end result.
The main benefit of this project was in providing many valuable lessons in how badly things can go wrong :-(
Then there are "moral rights" which complicate things in some countries.
In another comment I mention the Geograph project which uses cc-by-sa. For some more background to that, I wrote about the reasons for selecting that licence to ensure long-term freedom of the archive here: http://www.geograph.org.uk/help/freedom
What the comment you replied to point out is that if I release something under the GPL and then assign copyright to you, you can legally decide to relicense that code under a proprietary license so that the people buying it from me don't have to abide by the GPL.
If I don't assign copyright, on the other hand, any such third parties would need my permission too.
I wonder if it would stand a chance as a private members bill....
A project that does not require central copyright assignment and that receives sufficient outside contributions cannot have that happen, provided it's licensed under something like the (L)GPL.
Copyright paralysis can be a feature rather than a bug.