Much is not yet determined, but what is ... is upsetting.
Members shall give effect to the provisions of this Agreement. A Party may implement in its domestic law more extensive protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights than is required by this Agreement, provided that such protection and enforcement does not contravene the provisions of this Agreement. -Page 2
This Agreement shall be without prejudice to provisions governing the availability, acquisition, scope, and maintenance of intellectual property rights contained in a Party’s law. -Page 2
Each Party shall ensure that enforcement procedures, to the extent set forth in the civil and criminal enforcement sections of this Agreement, are available under its law so as to permit effective action against an act of [trademark, copyright or related rights][intellectual property rights] infringement which takes place [by means of the Internet][in the digital environment] , including expeditious remedies to prevent infringement and remedies which constitute a deterrent to further infringement. -Page 18
So far it's agreed that domestic enforcement of copyright law has to at least meet some internationally agreed upon requirements.
And that those enforcement procedures shall include expeditious remedies to prevent infringement.
So far it sounds like this would give some of the participating countries the authority to straight turn of the warbls.
I'm waiting for the remaining 80% of the document (everything in brackets) to be hashed out before I get my panties in a bunch.
But I don't have the most confidence in an international community determining the proper definitions of such words as "reasonable" or "effective action".