Virtual worlds, real legal risks: Is Zimbabwe ready?

By Julita Mushati and Fungai Chimwamurombe

Globally, businesses are cautiously stepping into a new frontier — the metaverse.

Once a niche concept reserved for gamers and sci-fi enthusiasts, the metaverse has rapidly transformed into a thriving digital economy where avatars attend concerts, shop in virtual stores, and purchase everything from virtual sneakers to designer digital handbags.

These products may be intangible, but they are paid for with real money — and global brands have already embraced this emerging space to stay connected with a new generation of online consumers.

This exciting shift, however, brings with it an equally exciting legal question: how do Zimbabwe’s trademark laws respond when commerce moves from physical shelves to pixelated worlds? A trademark, at its core, protects a brand’s identity and prevents others from free-riding on its reputation.

For decades, this protection has been grounded firmly in the real world stopping counterfeits, preventing logo misuse, or guarding against brand dilution. Yet in the metaverse, imitation takes on a new form. Someone can now create a virtual Adidas tracksuit or a digital version of a Zimbabwean brands, such as Haus of Stone, J-Sabelo and Vanhu Vamwe, and sell it in a virtual marketplace, all without ever touching a sewing machine or stepping into a store.

The first challenge lies in how the law defines a trademark. Section 2 of the Trade Marks Act [Chapter 26:04] (amended by Act 10 of 2001), describes a ‘mark’, as “any sign which can be represented graphically and is capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of another.”

This definition is surprisingly broad, and in theory, it can be applied or extend to signs used in virtual environments. A logo displayed on a virtual storefront is still a logo; a name on a digital product still functions as a badge of origin. The law, however, never envisaged an economy where “goods” exist purely in pixel form. Nothing in the Act explicitly mentions virtual goods, digital assets, or NFTs, which leaves brand owners navigating uncharted territory.

Classification poses another obstacle. Zimbabwe relies on the Nice Classification system, but the version currently in use, Class 8, was created long before virtual goods entered the economic mainstream. In global practice, downloadable digital goods like virtual clothing are now classified under Class 9, while services in virtual environments fall under traditional service classes such as Class 35 or Class 41.

Territoriality further complicates the picture. Trademarks are territorial in nature, however, the metaverse has no borders. A virtual shop could be hosted on servers in another country, operated by anonymous users, accessed by consumers from across continents all while displaying a Zimbabwean brand unlawfully. Enforcing rights in such a fluid, borderless environment becomes a daunting, and sometimes unrealistic, task.

Even determining what qualifies as “use in the course of trade” under Section 9 of the Act raises interesting debates. If a user sells digital sneakers adorned with someone else’s logo to an avatar, is that trade? Most likely yes but only because the interpretation is stretched to fit a modern context. The Act itself does not say so. Without clear statutory or judicial guidance, brand owners are left to guess how far their rights extend into virtual reality.

Yet despite these gaps, the metaverse offers immense opportunity for Zimbabwean businesses. As local brands grow digitally, they should consider whether their trademarks are broad enough to shield them in virtual markets. Zimbabwe’s IP system may not be entirely metaverse-ready, but it is flexible enough to allow strategic use if businesses make use of it early.

At a policy level, the country has an opportunity to lead. The goal is not to reinvent trademark law, but to modernize its application so it can protect brands wherever they operate be it on a shop shelf in Harare or a virtual storefront floating in a digital skyline.

The metaverse may feel distant from everyday business life in Zimbabwe, but it reflects the direction in which global commerce is moving. Understanding how trademarks function in these new environments is not merely a legal exercise it is part of building resilient, future-proof brands.

Julita Mushati is a legal intern at Zenas Legal Practice (Pvt) Limited and can be contacted for feedback on julitazenaslegalpractice.com and whatsapp 0772306088

Fungai Chimwamurombe is a registered legal practitioner and Senior Partner at Chimwamurombe Legal Practice and can be contacted through email fungai@zenaslegalpractice.com.