Jurisdiction is the only thing you cannot change later.
A server moves in an afternoon. A disk grows online. What cannot be changed, once a demand has already arrived, is which legal system your host answers to.
One country, chosen on purpose
Everyone else sells you a location. A location is a latency figure. What decides whether your server is still running next week is the law it sits under.
- Country
- Moldova
- Status
- Non-EU, non-EEA
- Alliances
- None
- Entity
- Domiciled here
Two models
A picker is not a position. They are not even the same product.
Ask any provider with a location list what happens to a server in Frankfurt when a German notice arrives. The honest answer is that it comes down, because German law reaches it. That is the whole difference.
What you are sold
Nine flags on a map
Eight of them are rented from somebody else, in countries whose law is exactly what you were trying to leave.
What we do
One country we chose
Racks, switches and the company itself, in the same jurisdiction. Nothing to renegotiate when a demand arrives.
What you are sold
A dropdown at checkout
You pick a city for latency. Nobody tells you which statute follows the server, because that would end the sale.
What we do
A published legal position
What applies, what does not, and the text it comes from. Read it before you pay rather than after.
What you are sold
Support that says “our upstream”
The provider you pay is not the one holding the machine. Two contracts up, somebody you never chose can pull the plug.
What we do
One entity, one contract
We own the hardware and answer for it. There is no upstream to hide behind, and no one else to blame.
The reasoning
Four reasons one is the right number
Nine jurisdictions means nine sets of rules.
A provider spanning the EU, the US and Asia obeys the strictest of them in practice, because a single takedown pipeline is cheaper to run than nine.
Depth beats breadth for this product.
One building we own, two carriers we chose, one company under one law. Every euro that would go into a ninth flag goes into the one that matters.
And it is checkable.
One country means one legal answer, which means you can verify it. Nine countries means a footnote nobody reads and a promise nobody can test.
And why this one
More permissive places exist. They have no machines in them.
The Seychelles, Belize and Nevis are all further outside the reach of a takedown notice than Moldova. None of them has the infrastructure to matter.
The legal positionWhy not the Seychelles or Belize?
Because “Seychelles hosting” almost always means a Seychelles company whose servers sit in a European datacentre — under European law, which is the thing you were avoiding. The company is offshore; the machine is not. Ask any such provider where the disk physically is and watch the answer get vague.
Why not Iceland or Switzerland?
Both are excellent for privacy and both are inside the EEA’s regulatory orbit — Iceland as an EEA member, Switzerland through a dense web of bilateral agreements. Strong on data protection, weaker on the specific question of who can compel a host to remove something.
What does Moldova have that the others do not?
The combination. A permissive legal position and real carrier-neutral datacentre capacity and 35 ms to Frankfurt. Take any one away and the other two stop being useful. It is the only place we found where all three hold at once.
What if Moldovan law changes?
Then we would tell you, in the transparency report and by email, before it took effect rather than after. A single jurisdiction makes that promise possible — a provider tracking nine legal systems cannot honestly make it, which is one more reason we run one.
Read on
The argument is only worth what the detail is worth
Everything above is checkable. The next two pages are where you check it.