Obama disagrees with some details of the bill, not with the broad outlines. He wants the bill to pass, but he wants some also wants some changes made. He's using (threat of) veto power as leverage to get those changes made. A veto would be a blunt and somewhat counter-productive response, but veto power is the main piece of leverage that comes with the office.

So yeah, he actually likes the bill and the likelihood is that he will sign it or some form of it. The veto threat is just part of the dance.

An NDAA passes regularly to fund the armed forces, including benefits for veterans etc. Every President in recent memory signed a bunch of them. That's not comparable to CISPA

I was coming to say the same thing. I appreciated that he made the statement before the vote though. Note that it appeared to matter.

The veto threat is more than just a simple threat to veto, it's a tactic to make the executive opinion obvious and to try and influence lawmakers to change a bill before delivering it.

They obviously don't have to listen.