As far as I'm concerned, if it's not encrypted, it "shouldn't" be illegal to monitor, no matter what the content. Of course that doesn't mean that there might be some poorly written laws that could be interpreted to mean that it was illegal. The truth is that all of us are "receiving" the internet data, because it's coming down the coax from the lnbf. The real question then is what you do with it. Are you locking on these transponders to peak on a sat? Are you pulling in any of the PIDs to help identify the transponder to help figure out what sat you're on? Do you look at any of the IP data to see if it's internet or video or other info, and if it's video, do you see any difference between video sent as IP vs video sent via DVB??? Do you see any difference between video sent via IP/DVB vs text sent via IP/DVB? If you intercept the text, do you just monitor it out of curiosity, or do you make some use of it like by making stock market purchases based on what you read, or do you try to sell the content???
I really think that it's virtually impossible for lawmakers to create a law the draws the line at any reasonable place. I don't doubt that there may be some laws addressing this, but I feel certain that if there are, that those laws probably technically make it illegal to do things that are clearly legal, so I am certain that they would have to be flawed laws. The ONLY realistic way to draw the line is to say that anything is OK if it's not encrypted, because it's so easy for them to encrypt that if they put something up there that ISN'T encrypted, then they have to expect that it's being intercepted. It's all being intercepted by the NSA anyway.