In general, it is mind-numbingly boring, is filled with inactive clauses like "each party shall endeavour to promote access to the public domain", dives often into internal details of processes that are better described more broadly with the details left to the countries, and establishes special laws for special industries like Agricultural Chemical Products. It seems like it would advantage lawyers more than anyone else, and may be worth opposing solely on the grounds of being badly written.
The treaty requires countries to have software patents and patents for business processes (E.1). This is a big deal.
There is a section about "traditional knowledge" and "traditional cultural expressions" as they relate to "genetic resources", which is odd because DNA was only discovered around 60 years ago and there should be no traditional anything regarding it. This makes me wonder what these phrases really mean.
There is a new and very brief section (F) regarding industrial designs, which should already be covered by patents and trade secrets, which again makes me wonder what this phrase really means.
Section G.10 forbids reverse-engineering, taking the DMCA international. This is another big deal. Section H.9 specifically forbids decoding satellite signals.
Section H.2 requires courts to accept that someone is a copyright holder based on their word alone. They don't have to prove it. This will encourage false claims of ownership.
Section I.3 makes ISPs liable for copyright infringement if they fail to block access to material upon notification of the copyright holder.