I think I’m missing something here in your (arguably noble) intent. You were in fact intending on engaging in commercial business activities. There is no question about that.
Selling a tangible business product (printed matter) to the public IS commerce.
Let’s look at this privacy issue, and congruence of the reasons you sited for wanting to ‘shield’ (bad pun, I know) your identity in the form of your name as legal agent and business address of record.
Did your merchant gateway (‘Authorize . net’, PayPal, Stripe, Square, etc.) permit you to enter into a commercial relationship with them under the terms of the anonymity you cite as being the reason for you declining to engage in a TM agreement with ZF?
Did you provide truthful and legally serviceable contact information for yourself when registering the domain, “STICKERZ.CASH”, irrespective of whether you chose to use a privacy agency (legal, servicable agent) to show on public WHOIS record for this domain registration?
Did you provide a fake address for yourself with the printer/vendor when ordering the stickers, opting to ship to some third party anonymizing physical address, for that product?
Have you provided fraudulent or incorrect data with regards to your legal name, physical address, phone number, Social Security number, birthdate, etc., to your bank when setting up the bank account where funds from your commercial activity will be placed by your merchant provider?
I pose those questions rhetorically, since the point here is not that you were seeking to circumvent local and federal laws (which I doubt you were), but rather, that (I presume) you have already entered into commercial agreements and provided legally serviceable contact information that is true and correct to those other institutions in the course of your endeavor to engage in retail commercial activity.
So, my next question is NOT of a rhetorical nature: Why do you think your professional relationship should be any different with regards to your true and correct business contact information where the registered Trademark/Servicemark holder is concerned, than it is with any of the other business entities with which you contracted with?
I think part of the confusion here, is the potential for ZEC shielded transactions to legitimately anonymize, to a large degree, the p2p relationship and transfer/holding of assets, verses the lawful requirement that you disclose your true and legally serviceable contact data when engaging in commercial activities - not the least of which may also include acquiring a Tax ID number (EIN, or what used to be called a ‘99’ number in the U.S.) from the IRS, registering with the State Board of Equalization / Franchise Tax Board, and business licenses for the locales that you operate in and/or service.
NOTE: I am citing entities and business requirements/practices central to business operations in the United States. If you’re Headquartered/operating in a different jurisdiction then other relevant entities may instead be more appropriate to your business.
I would also recommend that you retain the services of an appropriate attorney the next time you consider engaging in a business venture, if there are any aspects of such that are not completely clear to you, so as not to run afoul of the law.
I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on the matter, and why, from my observations you seemingly feel these legal requirements don’t apply equally to your particular situation.