By CloutBase | Harare September 9, 2026

The battle over the commercial use of legends music has taken a fresh turn. ZIMURA steps into the heated dispute. It warns against treating a single event licence as a free pass to use an artist’s catalogue.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, ZIMURA said a US$150 cover-band licence circulating on social media was issued for one specific event and one day, insisting that it did not authorise the continued commercial exploitation of Zimbabwean musical works.

The intervention comes as questions continue to swirl around the use of legends music with Fungisai Zvakavapano being the most vocal on social media, condemning Intotal band for using her music without her consent.

The music is being used in commercial performances linked to In Total and the ECOBANK Legends Night tours, with the association saying copyright owners must retain control over how their works are commercially used.

According to ZIMURA, the licence did not amount to a blanket or permanent authorisation and did not permit future performances, recording, reproduction, distribution or other commercial exploitation beyond the conditions under which it was issued.

“A licence is only valid within the scope, period and conditions under which it was issued,” ZIMURA said.

The association also challenged claims that Intotal had maintained continuous licensing arrangements covering its commercial performances, tours and events.

ZIMURA said that, based on records available to it, Intotal had not maintained a general licence with the organisation for the commercial exploitation currently associated with its performances, beyond the single event licence.

More significantly, ZIMURA said it had no record of royalties being remitted specifically to Fungisai arising from the commercial exploitation of her musical works by In Total.

It also said it had not received royalties from the ECOBANK Legends Night tours.

ZIMURA’s intervention directly backs Fungisai’s position in the dispute, with the association identifying the singer as one of its members and saying she is entitled to protection and representation over her intellectual property.

The organisation stressed, however, that its support should not be interpreted as deciding the merits of any case that could eventually reach court.

Instead, it framed the dispute around a broader question confronting Zimbabwe’s music industry: who controls an artist’s music once it becomes commercially valuable?

ZIMURA said musicians have the right to control and protect their intellectual property, object to unauthorised exploitation, demand proper licensing and accounting, receive royalties where applicable and pursue legal remedies when their rights are infringed.

The association also took aim at the growing social-media debate around the dispute, warning journalists, bloggers and commentators against drawing definitive conclusions from selective documents or online posts.

“A social media post is not a licence,” ZIMURA said, while adding that a receipt for one event should not be treated as unlimited authorisation for future commercial exploitation.

The statement adds another layer to a controversy that has increasingly moved beyond the stage and into questions of ownership, royalties and the rights of Zimbabwean musicians.