This bill has been called the "Hollywood Hacking Bill" essentally the bill seeks to provide legal protection for copyright-owners who wish to employ self-help measures.

From a technical prospective the bill does not permit illegal activities as believed by many but again, it seeks to offer legal protection for those participating in the twarting efforts.

For example:

(if x is owner and y is infringer and z is public)

If y is sharing files produced by x with z. Then x can act as z to obtain and verify that these files are indeed ones covered by copyright law this infringment is logged against y for later litigation.

There are companies that provide these services for x and they cover 100% of all p2p services by impersonating z (this is legal because they are not doing anything that anyone else can't do.)
they then take this information and forward it to the ISP of y because usually this type of activity violates an AUP (acceptable use policy as a condition of service from the ISP.)

These companies that provide the service for x offer more technically advanced methods of twarting piracy such as putting up banks of servers spread throughout the p2p services hosting crippled or impossible to get content in and effort to discourage users -- This information could also be used to log attempts to get at illegal content by z. Some elements of these methods could end in a law-suits against the companies. (This does not mean that the person bringing the suit could win, it just means that the company might have to waste legal resources defending their actions.)

This bill has clearly defined steps for initiating such actions it also includes limitations some of the most important ones that are totally overlooked when people are discussing the bill are:

x or any representative of x CANNOT delete files y or z(s) computers. x or any representative of x CANNOT destroy or tamper with files in y or z(s) computer and finally, any more advanced technological solutions used to thwart piracy CANNOT adversely affect users not involved in the actual infringment.

There are some potentials for abuse and this is what is currently being debated.

http://www.leeware.com