SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION

TO: ALL PERSONS AND ENTITIES RESIDING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WHO, BETWEEN DECEMBER 5, 2001 AND APRIL 11, 2008, PURCHASED ONLINE A SYMANTEC SUBSCRIPTION PRODUCT WITH A STOCK KEEPING UNIT THAT DESIGNATES THE PRODUCT AS AN UPGRADE, THE INSTALLATION OF WHICH RESULTED IN THE UNINSTALLATION OF ANOTHER SYMANTEC SUBSCRIPTION PRODUCT PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THAT PRODUCT’S SUBSCRIPTION.

• What Is This Case About? This is a class action lawsuit against Symantec Corp. (“Symantec”). The lawsuit alleges that Symantec, the company that sells Norton computer security products, has an unlawful policy of terminating subscription time of certain customers who purchased upgrades, without providing a credit or refund for unused subscription time and fails to disclose this policy. Symantec denies these allegations and asserts that, at all times, its actions and business practices have been lawful and appropriate. The court has not ruled on the merits of the claims.
  

• Why Did I Get This Notice?  You are receiving this notice because you may be a member of the class and your rights may be affected by the litigation.
  
  

• Who Is Included In The Class?   The class is defined as follows: All persons and entities residing in the United States of America who, between December 5, 2001 and April 11, 2008, purchased online a Symantec Subscription Product with a Stock Keeping Unit that designates the product as an upgrade, the installation of which resulted in the uninstallation of another Symantec Subscription Product prior to the expiration of that Product’s subscription. Symantec Subscription Product means any antivirus, internet security, internet safety and other software product sold by or on behalf of Symantec with a subscription for protection updates, content updates and/or other updates, including Norton Antivirus, Norton Internet Security, Norton Personal Firewall, Norton SystemWorks, Norton Confidential and Norton 360. Excluded from the class are all persons and entities who purchased upgrades through Symantec’s Online Store. Also excluded are defendant, its agents and affiliates, any government entities, and any persons and entities for whom Symantec added back the subscription time upon request.

  The Court also certified a subclass consisting of: All members of the class who purchased online, primarily for personal, household or family purposes, a Symantec Subscription Product with a Stock Keeping Unit that designates the product as an upgrade, the installation of which resulted in the uninstallation of another Symantec Subscription Product prior to the expiration of that Product’s subscription.

• More Details About The Lawsuit.  Plaintiffs claim that each Class member purchased Norton computer security software which came with a subscription for regular “content updates,” which keep the security software up to date. These updates are delivered by Symantec via online downloads through the LiveUpdate feature of the Norton software. As the subscription expiration date approaches, the Norton security software prompts the user to consider renewing their subscription for another term and also presents an opportunity to upgrade to a new product by making an online purchase. If the user then chooses to purchase an upgrade, the new subscription begins when the upgrade is installed, not when the existing subscription expires. Plaintiffs allege that the new subscription should begin when the existing subscription expires, and that Symantec unlawfully terminated subscription time without providing a credit or refund and without disclosing this policy.
  

  Symantec denies all liability to plaintiffs and the Class, and asserts that its actions and business practices, at all times, have been lawful and appropriate.

  To see a list of Norton security software at issue, click here

  
  

• What Claims Have Been Made?   The representative plaintiffs have filed a Consolidated Second Amended Complaint which alleges the following: violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Cal. Civ. Code §§1750 et seq., violation of the Unfair Competition Act, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§17200 et seq., violation of the False Advertising Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§17500 et seq., breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, money had and received, unjust enrichment and declaratory relief.
  
  To see a copy of the Consolidated Second Amended Complaint, click here

  
  
  

• The Court Has Certified This Case As A Class Action.   By Order dated May 7, 2008, the Honorable Jack Komar of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California certified the Class and Subclass identified above.

  To see a copy of the Court’s Order certifying this case as a class action, click here

  
  

  The court has not yet decided on the merits of this case. This means that there has been no ruling as to who wins and who loses. The court will decide this issue at a later date. For present purposes, the court has only determined that this case may proceed as a class action.

  
  

• Do I Need To Take Any Action? If you wish to remain in this case, you are not required to do anything at this time and you will be bound by any judgment that may be entered in this action, whether it is favorable or unfavorable. This means that if there is a recovery, you may be entitled to share in the proceeds of that recovery. If there is no recovery, you may not pursue a lawsuit on your own involving any of the same issues in this lawsuit. If you remain in this case, you will be represented by the attorneys for the class representatives. You may, but are not required to, retain an attorney on your own to enter an appearance and represent you in this case.
  
  

  You also have the right to exclude yourself from this case. To exclude yourself, you must send a written request for exclusion to the following address:

  
  

  PO Box 1231
  Minneapolis, MN 55440-1231

  
  

  The request for exclusion must contain your name and address and be signed by you. The request for exclusion must also be postmarked by November 19, 2008.

  
  

• Who Are The Class Representatives?  The class representatives are Bruce Heverly, Phil Margolis, Wendy Raditz and Neshaminy Valley Natural Foods Distributor, Ltd.

  
  
  

• Who Are The Attorneys Representing The Class?   The attorneys representing the class are:

  
  

  GREEN & PAGANO LLP Michael Scott Green (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 522 Route 18 North P.O. Box 428 East Brunswick, NJ 08816 Telephone: 800-270-8695 nortoncase@heverlylawyers.com	KANTROWITZ GOLDHAMER & GRAIFMAN, P.C. Gary S. Graifman 747 Chestnut Ridge Road Chestnut Ridge, New York 10977 Telephone: 800-270-8695 nortoncase@heverlylawyers.com
  CHAVEZ & GERTLER LLP Mark A. Chavez (Bar No. 90858) 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, California 94941 Telephone: 800-270-8695 nortoncase@heverlylawyers.com	SMOLOW & LANDIS Michael H. Landis (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 204 Two Neshaminy Interplex Trevose, PA 19053 Telephone: 800-270-8695 nortoncase@heverlylawyers.com
  KENDRICK & NUTLEY C. Benjamin Nutley (SBN 177431) 1055 E. Colorado Blvd., 5th Floor Pasadena, CA 91106 Telephone: 800-270-8695 nortoncase@heverlylawyers.com

• How Will The Attorneys Representing The Class Be Paid? If plaintiffs prevail in this lawsuit, attorneys’ fees and costs will be deducted from the recovery on behalf of the class or will be paid by Symantec. In either case, the court must approve the amount paid to the attorneys. You are not personally responsible for paying any of the attorneys representing the class.
  

• Additional Information. This website also contains the following information. To view this information, simply click on the link below:

  Consolidated Second Amended Complaint

  Order dated May 7, 2008 certifying this case as a Class Action

  List of Norton security software at issue