Beginning of the end for the Internet in the UK, page 1

124A
Obligation to notify subscribers of copyright infringement reports

(1)
This section applies if it appears to a copyright owner that—

(a)
a subscriber to an internet access service has infringed the owner’s copyright by means of the service; or

(b)
a subscriber to an internet access service has allowed another person to use the service, and that other person has infringed the owner’s copyright by means of the service.

(2)
The owner may make a copyright infringement report to the internet service provider who provided the internet access service if a code in force under section 124C or 124D (an “initial obligations code”) allows the owner to do so.

(3)
A “copyright infringement report” is a report that—

(a)
states that there appears to have been an infringement of the owner’s copyright;

(b)
includes a description of the apparent infringement;

(c)
includes evidence of the apparent infringement that shows the subscriber’s IP address and the time at which the evidence was gathered; and

(d)
complies with any other requirement of the initial obligations code.

(4)
An internet service provider who receives a copyright infringement report must notify the subscriber of the report if the initial obligations code requires the provider to do so.

(5)
A notification under subsection (4) must include—

(a)
a statement that it is sent under this section in response to a copyright infringement report made by a copyright owner;

(b)
a description of the apparent infringement;

(c)
evidence of the apparent infringement;

(d)
information about copyright and its purpose;

(e)
advice about how to obtain lawful access to copyright works;

(f)
advice about the protection of electronic communications networks that use wireless telegraphy; and

(g)
anything else that the initial obligations code requires it to include.

(6)
The things that may be required under subsection (5)(g), whether in general or in a particular case, include in particular statements that—

40

(a)
information about the apparent infringement may be kept by the internet service provider;

(b)
the copyright owner may require the provider to disclose which copyright infringement reports made by the owner to the provider relate to the subscriber;

(c)
following such a disclosure, the copyright owner may apply to a court to learn the subscriber’s identity and may bring proceedings against the subscriber for copyright infringement;

(d)
the number and nature of copyright infringement reports relating to the subscriber may be taken into account for the purposes of any technical measures.

(7)
In this section “notify”, in relation to a subscriber, means send a
notification to the electronic or postal address held by the internet service provider for the subscriber (and sections 394 to 396 do not apply).”

No mention of a "pirate finder general" or any militia. In fact this seems to be nothing more than a clarification in law of the existing process of infringement notification. In other words, this is already how copyright owners deal with copyright. The only reall addition to this is the "disconnection" which I doubt will pass as it is in violation of the EU convention on Human Rights (contrary to Mandelsons statement in the heading of the bill). It is nice to see there has been a limit placed on the maximum amount of damages that can be sought by the complainant.