Can information posted without a license and meant to be spread be assumed to allow commercial use?

In the USA, pure Information is not copyrightable since Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991), in which the Supreme Court held (emphasis mine):

57 [...] The white pages do nothing more than list Rural's subscribers in alphabetical order. This arrangement may, technically speaking, owe its origin to Rural; no one disputes that Rural undertook the task of alphabetizing the names itself. But there is nothing remotely creative about arranging names alphabetically in a white pages directory. It is an age-old practice, firmly rooted in tradition and so commonplace that it has come to be expected as a matter of course. [...] It is not only unoriginal, it is practically inevitable. This time-honored tradition does not possess the minimal creative spark required by the Copyright Act and the Constitution.

58 [...] As a constitutional matter, copyright protects only those constituent elements of a work that possess more than a de minimis quantum of creativity. Rural's white pages, limited to basic subscriber information and arranged alphabetically, fall short of the mark. As a statutory matter, 17 U.S.C. § 101 does not afford protection from copying to a collection of facts that are selected, coordinated, and arranged in a way that utterly lacks originality.

A list of bad areas on the internet sorted by the IP is just another list that is similar to 'subscribers of Rural' and could be seen as lacking originality like the white pages of a phone book.