Why? Zero-sum just refers to the allocation of a bounded quantity; growth is a quantity. If the derivative of a value is bounded, then the delta of that value over time is bounded.

If one new oil well is discovered every year, then you can say that who own that growth is zero-sum. You can also say that the amount anyone can increase their wealth via oil wells by is zero-sum.

Sum over the growth of capital over the year, and you find that the allocation of the ownership of growth is also zero-sum. And so are the proceeds of that yearly growth.

If your claim that the growth of the world's productivity on a yearly basis is unbounded, then sure, zero-sum isn't an applicable term.

If your claim is that you can generate growth without hampering the growth of others; that's true to a point. Someone needs to sweep the floors and take out the trash. You can make robots do it, but those robots need to be made and maintained by someone. Someone needs to make food as you do it. Someone is on "robot design duty" and someone is on "farming duty". The person on "farming duty" can't stop without someone coming in to replace them.

But I haven't been able to see any evidence of that claim being true.