According to The Lawyer news service, in a letter to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, IPA legal director, Marina Palomba argued that the measures proposed by the government would introduce a "very restrictive IP right to protect official sponsors".

"The law also reverses the standard presumption of innocence under English law by presuming advertisers guilty unless and until they can demonstrate they are not associating with the Games," she added.

Following something of a panic amongst the UK's business community regarding the protections put in place by the government's London Olympics Bill, published in July, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport published a fact sheet in September in an effort to set the record straight.

The legislation was formulated in order to meet the requirements of the International Olympics Committee, and to seek to control the practice of "ambush marketing" whereby advertising put in place by the official sponsors of an event is eclipsed by that of other organisations.

According to reports at the time of its release, under the proposed bill, use of the words “games”, “Two Thousand and Twelve”, “2012”, and “twenty twelve” in combination with each other or in combination with words including “gold,” “silver”, “bronze”, “London” and “summer” will be prohibited.

However, media claims that small businesses could face fines of up to £20,000 merely for inviting tourists to "Come to London in 2012" were dismissed by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, which announced at the time that:

"Several misleading ideas have appeared in recent media reports about the Government’s proposals to restrict ambush marketing around the 2012 Olympics."

Responding to the suggestion that only official sponsors can use words like ‘games’ and ‘gold’, the Department explained that:

"The Bill stops businesses unfairly cashing in on the London Olympics by wrongly implying that they have some form of association with the Games. But the Bill does not prevent the mere use of words like ‘games’ and ‘gold’. Instead it creates the London Olympics association right, which means the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG) can authorise certain persons – most likely official sponsors and commercial partners - to associate themselves with the Games."

It continued:

"The Bill sets out a list of words, including ‘games’ and ‘gold’, which when used in certain combinations by unauthorised persons may be used by the LOCOG as evidence of infringement of the association right. This measure is based on the model which Sydney developed before the 2000 Games. Our legislation fulfils the requirements of the International Olympic Committee to prevent ambush marketing and thereby protect their sponsors, who are vital to the economic well-being of the Games."

"London committed itself to fulfilling the IOC’s requirements during the bidding process. But we want to adopt a proportionate, common sense approach. We are concerned only to prevent instances of unfair association with the Games. So, for example, factual references to London and to the Olympics will still be perfectly legal."

It also dismissed the suggestion that using words like ‘games’ and ‘gold’ will automatically attract fines of £20,000, explaining that:

"People will not be fined simply because they have used words like ‘games’ or ‘gold’. However, if individuals or organisations use words like ‘games’ and ‘gold’ in combination to seek to create an unauthorised association with the Games, the LOCOG would be able to take civil action against them. It will have to be decided on a case by case basis whether infringement has occurred."

The Culture Department went on to reject the suggestion that such legislation is unprecedented, announcing that:

"The IOC require that we take all necessary steps to prevent ambush marketing. Sydney put very similar legislation in place before it hosted the 2000 Games. The words in the Bill which, when used in combination, are seen as likely to have created an association with the Games, are based on the Sydney legislation."