A trademark battle between Zap Africa, a rising crypto exchange, and fintech giant Paystack has opened a new front in Nigeria’s increasingly litigious tech space, one that has as much to do with branding as it does with the growing pains of an evolving ecosystem.
At the centre of the storm is the name “Zap,” which both companies claim as their intellectual property.
The confrontation, now marked by exchanged cease and desist letters, has spilt beyond legal filings into the court of public opinion, exposing what experts describe as deep intellectual property gaps in Nigeria’s startup culture.
A clash of launches
It all came to a head on March 24, 2025, when Paystack publicly launched Zap, its new consumer-facing product designed to deepen its reach in the B2C space. But instead of fanfare, the unveiling drew outrage from Zap Africa, which had been operating under the same brand since 2023.
Zap Africa’s co-founders, Tobi Asu-Johnson and Moore Dagogo-Hart, say they had been building the brand for nearly three years, with trademarks filed across multiple classes 35 (business management), 42 (tech services), and most crucially, 36 (financial services), the same class Paystack now occupies.
“We secured Class 35 in late 2023, then got Class 42 in 2024,” Asu-Johnson told Nairametrics. “Class 36, which covers financial services, was the final one—and we got it just weeks before Paystack’s launch.”
When Paystack’s Zap went live, Zap Africa sent a cease and desist. But Paystack responded with one of its own.
“They tried to take everything, from our slogan ‘you just got zapped’ to brand colours and even the ‘Z’ symbol on our logo. It feels like a complete hijack of our brand.”, Asu-Johnson said.
Attempts to resolve the issue amicably failed, Asu-Johnson added, and frustration continues to simmer on both sides.
Paystack’s defence
While Paystack declined to officially comment, a source familiar with the company’s position explained that due diligence had been conducted and that its trademark filings were sound.
“We filed for the ‘Zap’ trademark across multiple classes, including financial services,” the source said. “To our knowledge, Zap Africa didn’t have an active registration in Class 36 when we filed.”
That claim is now at the heart of the dispute.
What the experts say
For legal experts, the Zap vs. Paystack dispute is hardly surprising—and it’s a cautionary tale.
Tolu Olaloye, an intellectual property lawyer at Jackson, Etti & Edu, described the case as a classic example of the risks startups face when they don’t file trademarks across all relevant classes.
“In the Fan Milk v Mandarin Oriental case, the court ruled that if classes are unrelated, confusion is unlikely, but if they overlap—especially in a space as tight as fintech—you’re looking at a serious infringement case”, she told Nairametrics
Olaloye believes an out-of-court resolution might be in the best interest of both companies.
“Paystack could rebrand slightly—adjust the name, change the visual identity—without necessarily backing off the product,” she suggested.
Professor Bankola Sodipo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and former Dean of Law at Babcock University, in a chat with Nairametrics, stressed the role of the trademark registry in preventing disputes like this in the first place.
“The real legal test here is whether the brands are so similar that a reasonable consumer could confuse one for the other,” he explained.
Business consequences
Beyond the legalese, the fallout is already affecting Zap Africa’s business.
“Some users are afraid to trade on our platform,” co-founder Dagogo-Hart said. “They’re asking, ‘Will Zap still be around in six months?’ That kind of uncertainty is hard for a young business.”
Still, the company remains optimistic. “We followed all the rules,” he added. “We believe the facts are on our side.”
NACCIMA weighs in
Dele Kelvin Oye, President of the Nigerian Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines, and Agriculture (NACCIMA), urged both parties to seek a mediated solution rather than litigate in court.
“NACCIMA is willing to facilitate dispute resolution with the Trademark Registrar. Dragging this out in court could hurt the entire fintech space, discourage investors, and confuse consumers.”, Oye told Nairametrics.
He advised the firms to leverage NACCIMA’s National Dispute Resolution Centers to settle the matter swiftly.
The bigger picture: What startups should learn
The case underlines the importance of filing comprehensive IP protections early and across multiple trademark classes. Nigeria follows a first-to-file rule, meaning whoever files first typically has an advantage. But prior use, brand goodwill, and strategic legal coverage across classes matter just as much.
“Too many startups focus on product development and ignore IP, but the brand is just as valuable as the tech.”, Olaloye noted.
The Zap-Paystack standoff is not just a legal drama, it’s a wake-up call.
A reminder on trademark classifications
Nigeria’s trademark system is based on the Nice Classification, which separates trademarks into 45 classes. Class 36, the battleground in this case, covers financial services and is considered critical for fintech players.
Filing in one class doesn’t cover all use cases; companies must proactively file in adjacent or overlapping classes to truly protect their brand.
What you should know
- In May 2024, Paystack led a consortium to acquire Brass, a struggling fintech, alongside PiggyVest and angel investor Olumide Soyombo.
- Brass, founded by Sola Akindolu and Emmanuel Okeke, had raised $2 million over four years before facing financial headwinds.
- Following the acquisition, Brass now operates under new leadership, as its founders exited to pursue other ventures.
