I think what really stopped Cyc from getting a wider traction is its closed nature[0]. People do use Princeton WordNet, which you can get for free, even though it's a mess in many aspects. The issue and mentality here is similar to commercial Common Lisp implementations, and the underlying culture is similar (oldschool 80s AI). These projects were shaped with a mindset that major progress in computing will happen with huge government grants and plans[1]. However you interpret the last 30 years, it was not exactly true. It's possible that all these companies earn money for their owners, but they have no industry-wide impact.
I was half-tempted once or twice to use something like Cyc in some project, but it would probably be too much organizational hassle. Especially if it turned out to be something commercial I wouldn't want to be dependent on someone's licensing and financial whims, especially if it can be avoided.
[0] There was OpenCyc for a time, but it was scrapped.
[1] Compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20569098
Wikidata is also worth considering for that task. It is:
* Directly linked from Wikipedia [1]
* The data source for many infoboxes [2]
* Seeded with data from Wikipedia
* More active and integrated in community
* Larger in total number of concepts
Wikidata also has initiatives in lexicographic data [3] and images [4, 5].
On the subject of Cyc: the CycL "generalization" (#$genls) predicate inspired Wikidata's "subclass of" property [6], which now links together Wikidata's tree of knowledge.
---
1. See "Wikidata" link at left in all articles, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_base
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Infobox_templates_usi...
3. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Lexicographical_data/...
4. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wikimedia_Commons/Dev...
5. See "Structured data" tab in image details on Wikimedia Commons, e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mona_Lisa,_by_Leonar...
6. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P279#Archived_cr...