It's no fun trying to be the policing authority to make sure that Olympics sponsors get their money's worth. But someone has to do it.

That is what Vancouver has found out in recent weeks as it navigates the minefield between providing protection from ambush marketing by businesses that are not Olympics sponsors and guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression.

"It is very confused," admits city councillor Geoff Meggs, a lifelong left-winger who has had to defend the city's new bylaw aimed at controlling signage and public disturbances during the Olympics.

That bylaw has prompted criticism for its restrictions on freedom of speech, and also a lawsuit.

"I would have loved it if the bylaw had been written less broadly and if it had been written to clarify that it's directed at commercial expression not political activity," Mr. Meggs acknowledged.

He said councillors are going to get another chance in November to tighten up the bylaw to address what the city is trying to prevent - litter, obstruction of traffic corridors, activities that interfere with the rights of others to enjoy events and ambush marketing - rather than stopping people from wearing T-shirts that say "Olympics suck."

Efforts to control unauthorized advertising in areas reserved for sponsors have prompted much of the criticism.

Fuel was added to the fire last week when the provincial government increased penalties and powers of bylaw officers to enforce the temporary new bylaw.

That included the right of officers to go into homes to remove signs, and the possibility of $10,000 fines.

"To our knowledge, those are the worst restrictions we've seen a city put in place," said David Eby of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

"I've said to council, just make it clear this doesn't apply to political speech. And quite honestly, I don't understand what the problem is with a small business handing out a flyer."

The potential for guerrilla marketing is the problem. It's not unheard of for companies to pay condo residents to hang signs or fly balloons from their windows or patios near an Olympics site, or to flood areas with pamphlets, buttons and posters.

Simon Fraser University marketing professor Judy Zaichkowsky said official sponsors - and the cities that want their business - are forced to fight this because ambush marketers have been so pervasive in recent years.

"I think that's what they have to do. The problem is these sponsors put out this enormous amount of money" to be associated with the Games.

Many governments have had similar experiences in recent years with other sporting events having to protect the rights of companies that have paid millions of dollars to have their names plastered everywhere in camera view.

Great Britain just passed legislation to prevent businesses that are not official sponsors of the 2012 Olympics from referring to the Games in their marketing.

South Africa has introduced similar laws to protect sponsors and trademarks associated with the 2010 World Cup, while New Zealand recently introduced a Major Events Management Bill in anticipation of the 2011 World Rugby Cup and the Rowing World Championships in 2010.

Canada passed legislation in 2007 to protect the 2010 Olympic logo and trademark, a move that prompted complaints of heavy-handed control.

Now Vancouver has added local protection.

"This is part of a worldwide trend with more emphasis on protecting trademarks and intellectual property," said Mira Sundara Rajan, a University of B.C. law professor who specializes in monitoring the struggles to balance freedom of speech and copyright.

"On the other hand, we also see higher and higher levels of education among the public about their right to free speech."

Sundara Rajan said the most troublesome part of the process is that people are polarized over the issue.

"There's no balancing of rights."

Of course, part of the problem in Vancouver is that people don't understand how much power the city had already - so they're outraged at what they think is new.

The city's bylaw has been criticized for prohibiting "non-celebratory" signs. But the reality is that the city bans all signs in some places.

For the Olympics, it's actually relaxing its bylaw to allow the celebratory ones. Afterward, the prohibition on signs will be back in place.