A trademark battle between Zap Africa, a rising crypto alternate, and fintech big Paystack has opened a brand new entrance in Nigeria’s more and more litigious tech house, one which has as a lot to do with branding because it does with the rising pains of an evolving ecosystem.
On the centre of the storm is the identify “Zap,” which each corporations declare as their mental property.
The confrontation, now marked by exchanged stop and desist letters, has spilt past authorized filings into the courtroom of public opinion, exposing what specialists describe as deep mental property gaps in Nigeria’s startup tradition.
All of it got here to a head on March 24, 2025, when Paystack publicly launched Zap, its new consumer-facing product designed to deepen its attain within the B2C house. However as an alternative of fanfare, the revealing drew outrage from Zap Africa, which had been working beneath the identical model since 2023.
Zap Africa’s co-founders, Tobi Asu-Johnson and Moore Dagogo-Hart, say that they had been constructing the model for practically three years, with emblems filed throughout a number of courses 35 (enterprise administration), 42 (tech companies), and most crucially, 36 ({financial} companies), the identical class Paystack now occupies.
“We secured Class 35 in late 2023, then bought Class 42 in 2024,” Asu-Johnson advised Nairametrics. “Class 36, which covers {financial} companies, was the ultimate one—and we bought it simply weeks earlier than Paystack’s launch.”
When Paystack’s Zap went stay, Zap Africa despatched a stop and desist. However Paystack responded with one in every of its personal.
“They tried to take every thing, from our slogan ‘you simply bought zapped’ to model colors and even the ‘Z’ image on our emblem. It seems like a whole hijack of our model.”, Asu-Johnson stated.
Makes an attempt to resolve the difficulty amicably failed, Asu-Johnson added, and frustration continues to simmer on either side.
Whereas Paystack declined to formally remark, a supply aware of the corporate’s place defined that due diligence had been performed and that its trademark filings have been sound.
“We filed for the ‘Zap’ trademark throughout a number of courses, together with {financial} companies,” the supply stated. “To our data, Zap Africa didn’t have an lively registration in Class 36 once we filed.”
That declare is now on the coronary heart of the dispute.
For authorized specialists, the Zap vs. Paystack dispute is hardly stunning—and it’s a cautionary story.
Tolu Olaloye, an mental property lawyer at Jackson, Etti & Edu, described the case as a traditional instance of the dangers startups face after they don’t file emblems throughout all related courses.
“Within the Fan Milk v Mandarin Oriental case, the courtroom dominated that if courses are unrelated, confusion is unlikely, but when they overlap—particularly in an area as tight as fintech—you’re a severe infringement case”, she advised Nairametrics
Olaloye believes an out-of-court decision may be in the most effective curiosity of each corporations.
“Paystack might rebrand barely—modify the identify, change the visible id—with out essentially backing off the product,” she steered.
Professor Bankola Sodipo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and former Dean of Regulation at Babcock University, in a chat with Nairametrics, burdened the position of the trademark registry in stopping disputes like this within the first place.
“The true authorized take a look at right here is whether or not the manufacturers are so comparable {that a} affordable client might confuse one for the opposite,” he defined.
Past the legalese, the fallout is already affecting Zap Africa’s enterprise.
“Some customers are afraid to commerce on our platform,” co-founder Dagogo-Hart stated. “They’re asking, ‘Will Zap nonetheless be round in six months?’ That form of uncertainty is tough for a younger enterprise.”
Nonetheless, the corporate stays optimistic. “We adopted all the foundations,” he added. “We imagine the details are on our facet.”
Dele Kelvin Oye, President of the Nigerian Affiliation of Chambers of Commerce, Trade, Mines, and Agriculture (NACCIMA), urged each events to hunt a mediated answer slightly than litigate in courtroom.
“NACCIMA is prepared to facilitate dispute decision with the Trademark Registrar. Dragging this out in courtroom might harm the complete fintech house, discourage traders, and confuse shoppers.”, Oye advised Nairametrics.
He suggested the corporations to leverage NACCIMA’s Nationwide Dispute Decision Facilities to settle the matter swiftly.
The case underlines the significance of submitting complete IP protections early and throughout a number of trademark courses. Nigeria follows a first-to-file rule, which means whoever information first sometimes has a bonus. However prior use, model goodwill, and strategic authorized protection throughout courses matter simply as a lot.
“Too many startups deal with product improvement and ignore IP, however the model is simply as helpful because the tech.”, Olaloye famous.
Nigeria’s trademark system is predicated on the Good Classification, which separates emblems into 45 courses. Class 36, the battleground on this case, covers {financial} companies and is taken into account essential for fintech gamers.
Nigeria’s trademark system is predicated on the Good Classification, which separates emblems into 45 courses. Class 36, the battleground on this case, covers {financial} companies and is taken into account essential for fintech gamers.
Submitting in a single class doesn’t cowl all use instances; corporations should proactively file in adjoining or overlapping courses to actually defend their model.
