Gabriel M. Ramsey, a partner in both the Silicon Valley and San Francisco offices, is a member of the Intellectual Property Group and a leader of the Cybersecurity & Data Privacy Group.
Gabe focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and cybersecurity. He has twice been named one of the top 75 IP litigators in California by the Daily Journal and has been repeatedly recognized as an “IP Star" by Managing Intellectual Property
Gabe has substantial experience in high technology and entertainment
related matters involving copyright, trademark, trade secret and patent law. He
has significant experience in carrying out Internet enforcement actions and investigations
involving cybercrime, trade secret misappropriation, fraud and deceptive activity, data breaches and brand violations. He has also handled
many licensing matters, open source licensing disputes and general commercial
disputes. He has expertise in matters involving computer software, hardware, Internet and networking technologies, videogames, cloud computing, new media and entertainment content.
Gabe has represented Microsoft Corp., Facebook, Inc., McAfee, Inc., EMC
Corp., Oracle Corp., Perfect World Entertainment, Inc., NCSoft, Namco Bandai
Games, NVIDIA Corp., IGN Entertainment, Inc., CNET Networks, eHarmony.com, Say
Media, Audible Magic Corp., Affinity Circles, Inc., Gracenote, Inc., Fox
Entertainment Group, Fox Broadcasting, Universal Studios, The Walt Disney
Company, Lucasfilm, Ltd., LucasArts Entertainment Co., Digidesign and
His notable representations include the following:
Intellectual Property Matters
- Audible Magic Corp. Gabe led a team that successfully defended
Audible Magic in a patent infringement action brought by Blue Spike
LLC, in the Eastern District of Texas. Obtained summary judgment of
noninfringement for all asserted patents in Audible Magic's favor.
- EMC Corp. / RSA Security. Gabe successfully defended EMC and RSA in a patent infringement
matter involving data loss prevention and email security software.
- Fox Entertainment Group and Fox Broadcasting Corp. Gabe successfully defended Fox in a patent infringement action
involving forward error correction techniques allegedly used in
- Oracle. Gabe is on the brief for Oracle in Oracle v. Google (Fed. Cir.), a high stakes copyright appeal involving whether Android impermissibly copies Java.
- Photobucket. Gabe successfully defended Photobucket in a patent infringement case
involving online photosharing and access control technologies.
- MGA Entertainment, Inc. Gabe was part of a team defending MGA in a copyright, trade secret and contract matter involving fashion dolls.
- NVIDIA Corp. Gabe successfully defended NVIDIA in a patent infringement case involving graphics card and computer bus architectures.
- Affinity Circles, Inc. Gabe successfully represented Affinity Circles in a trade secret dispute involving social networking technology.
- eHarmony.com. Gabe represented eHarmony in a multi-defendant patent litigation involving load-balancing web and application servers.
- International Game Technology. Gabe defended IGT in a patent litigation involving digital gaming
technology, which resulted in invalidation of the asserted patents on
- Say Media. Gabe provides intellectual property advising and counseling to this Web-based video publishing company.
- Gracenote, Inc. Gabe represented Gracenote in a patent litigation involving online music recognition technology.
- The Walt Disney Company. Gabe has advised the Walt Disney Company on copyright matters.
- Universal Studios, Lucas Digital, and Oscar-Winning Special Effects Artist Christopher Boyes. Gabe assisted these clients in the successful defense of a copyright infringement case involving the motion picture The Lost World: Jurassic Park.
- Connectix Corporation. Gabe represented Connectix in a dispute over the creation of a
video game hardware emulator involving copyright, trade secret and
- Lucasfilm, Ltd. and LucasArts Entertainment Co. Gabe represented these clients as plaintiffs in a trademark
infringement action, resulting in a finding of infringement on summary
- Pioneer Corporation. Gabe represented Pioneer in an ongoing industry standard-setting
process involving the adoption of a digital video copy protection
solution based on DVD watermarking technology.
Internet Security, Safety And Brand Protection Matters
out action to disable 96 IP addresses and thousands of domains that
controlled the million computer "Rustock" botnet, capable of sending
30-40 billion spam email messages per day. The botnet was then
the single largest source of spam in the world. This action decimated
this massive criminal infrastructure.
- Carried out action to
disable 276 domains that controlled the 400,000 computer "Waledac"
botnet capable of sending nearly 1.5 billion spam email messages per
day. This action was the first civil action of its kind.
out actions to disrupt the "Zeus," "IceIX," "SpyEye" and "Citadel"
financial theft botnets, which were collectively responsible for
hundreds of millions of dollars of online account theft.
- Microsoft v. Sabelnikov, carried out this action to dismantle the "Kelihos" spam botnet and pursue the botnet's creators.
- Microsoft v. Yong,
carried out this action to dismantle the "Nitol" botnet, which
leveraged counterfeit versions of the Windows operating system to
distribute the malware and was used to carry out theft of personal
- Microsoft v. Chupakhin,
carried out this action to dismantle the "Bamital" botnet, which was
engaged in online advertising "click" fraud, and pursue the botnet's
Cybercrime, Fraud, Abuse
and successfully pursued participants in an international criminal
organization responsible for an enormous volume of fake pharmaceutical
and adult spam email.
- Identified and pursued defendant that used
Internet means to misappropriate and convey confidential technical
material in a trade secret and corporate espionage matter.
action against parties fraudulently manipulating email spam filters and
carrying out illegal automated creation of email accounts and spam
- Successfully implemented enforcement program to
disrupt distribution of pirated software through offshore file-sharing
sites and peer-to-peer networks.
- Investigate and pursue credit card fraud ring abusing online gaming platform.
- Investigated and initiated international civil litigation and law enforcement referrals against an "advance fee fraud ring."
- Investigated and pursued perpetrators of an online and telephonic "customer support" scam.
action against website publisher and internet traffic provider in a
novel Internet case related to "click fraud" and related fraudulent
online advertising practices.
- Investigated and pursued party engaged in fraudulent manipulation of search engine promotional program.
- Investigated and advised regarding various malware and adware programs.
- Defending Microsoft in Holomaxx v. Microsoft, a matter involving use and implementation of spam email filters.
- Prosecuted actions against cybersquatters infringing trademarks.
out international enforcement actions against promoters and
distributors of counterfeit goods, including consumer products, digital
works, software and pharmaceutical products.
Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, X One, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. 16-CV-06050-LHK (Judge Lucy H. Koh)
Uber Technologies, the transportation network giant, recently lost a motion to dismiss a two-patent infringement suit when the Court found that Plaintiff X One, Inc.’s patent claims are directed to patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Court held that the individual claim elements are conventional, but as an ordered combination provide an inventive concept sufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss. READ MORE
Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, With Leave to Amend, Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars, LLC, et al. v. Treasury Wine Estates Americas Co., 16-cv-04922-RS (Judge Richard Seeborg)
Plaintiffs in trademark cases may be tempted to file suit as early as possible to head off any potential consumer confusion. But as a recent order explains, plaintiffs need to keep in mind that the Lanham Act requires a “use in commerce” to maintain a complaint. Plaintiffs who fail to plead an adequate “use in commerce” could find themselves fighting (and losing) a motion to dismiss. READ MORE
Order Denying Finjan, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., Case No. 14-cv-1197 (Judge William Orrick)
In a battle that likely felt like déjà vu for the parties, Finjan for the second time argued its patents were valid over Sophos’s prior art because Sophos failed to produce sufficient evidence of public availability. The first time was in a 2010 Delaware action, when Finjan unsuccessfully made this same argument with respect to similar patents and similar prior art. Those patents were ultimately held invalid based on the prior art. In the present case, Sophos’s invalidity case survived yet again. But Sophos could have had a more resounding victory had it adequately disclosed all of its prior art earlier in the case. READ MORE
Order Granting Judgment on the Pleadings, Whitepages, Inc. v. Isaacs, et al., Case No. 16-cv-00175-RS (Judge Richard Seeborg)
Litigants continue to use Alice and its progeny to cull the ranks of patents asserted in the Northern District. In Whitepages v. Isaacs, Judge Seeborg considered a patent that purported to bring caller ID to mobile phones and the internet. His opinion holding the patent invalid mentions factors that are becoming familiar hallmarks of patents vulnerable to § 101 challenges: reciting longstanding business practices, invoking industry-standard technology, and requiring no more than generic use of computers. READ MORE