Catalogues consulted on September 7, 2026. Prices vary by region and commitment; they are not the amounts paid during the test.
Results and offers
| Criterion | HushVPShushvps.com | AlexHostalexhost.com |
|---|---|---|
| Results recorded during the test | ||
| Test outcome | Service running at the end of the 6 months | Notice no. 2 |
| Country of the rented server | Not recorded | Not recorded |
| Material published | Not recorded | Copyrighted adult material, published without authorisation. |
| What triggered the cut-off | Active at the end of the test | Copyright notice. |
| What followed | Active at the end of the test |
|
| What the host publishes | ||
| Published legal entity | No legal entity published | AlexHost SRL |
| Company country | Not recorded | Moldova |
| Stated position on notices | Explicitly rejects the “DMCA ignored” label« not bulletproof, not DMCA-ignored, and not an anything-goes host » | States it acts on notices« does not interfere with justified complaints of copyright holders » |
| Copyright policy | No copyright policy published | Read the copyright policy |
| 2 GB tier | Phantom, USD 14.00 per month — entry-level plan | R2 (Ryzen), EUR 20.00 per monthRyzen plan in Moldova. Other regions use different plans. |
| Locations | 14 published locations | 6 published locations |
| Transparency on notices | No notice volume published | No notice volume published |
Key facts
AlexHost cut the service at notice no. 2. The testers recorded a double charge and obtained no refund. Its contract also provides for sharing subscriber contact details with the complainant. HushVPS rejects the “DMCA ignored” label and publishes neither a legal entity nor a copyright policy.
Place the plan price alongside the cost of the dispute
HushVPS lists Phantom at USD 14.00 per month, with monthly payment advertised. AlexHost lists R2 (Ryzen) at EUR 20.00 per month for its Ryzen plan in Moldova. The comparison uses the same 2 GB tier, with prices expressed in different currencies. These catalogues provide a starting point for budgeting, but AlexHost’s case adds something the rate alone cannot convey: the testers report a double charge and no refund. To assess what a rental may ultimately cost, the billing aftermath therefore belongs alongside the public price of the offer being considered.
Distinguish complaint handling from the disclosure clause
AlexHost publishes a form asking for the complainant’s identity, the addresses of the reported content and evidence of prior contact with its operator. The provider states that it may notify its customer and will not obstruct justified complaints. Its contract also provides for sharing subscriber contact details with the complainant, a provision absent from the form’s presentation alone. This is a published clause, not a disclosure observed during the test. At HushVPS, the retained sources describe a rejection of the “DMCA ignored” label, without a comparable dedicated copyright procedure.
The aftermath of a cut-off belongs in the result
AlexHost’s cut-off is associated with notice no. 2. The record adds a double charge and a refund not obtained, without quantifying the amounts involved in that dispute. These facts describe different consequences: the cut-off ends the service, while billing determines what remains to be resolved financially. HushVPS, meanwhile, belongs to the services active on September 1, 2026. The comparison therefore brings together observed continuity and the aftermath of an interruption, without deriving a total loss from public prices consulted after the test period ended.
Choose with account terms and the aftermath of an interruption
In this comparison, HushVPS is the choice arising from the test’s continuity criterion. Its offer advertises signup without an identity document and an optional email address, account conditions to read alongside the contract. When assessing AlexHost, the decisive point goes beyond receiving complaints: its clause on subscriber contact details and the recorded billing dispute also concern the customer relationship. A complete decision therefore combines the information requested at signup, the disclosure provisions and the reported financial aftermath, before using price to choose between the offers.
Questions to help you choose
Does the test establish that AlexHost disclosed the subscriber’s contact details?
The dossier identifies that possibility in the published contract. It reports no actual disclosure during the test. The observed result concerns the cut-off, double charge and lack of a refund; the clause helps explain the offer’s terms.
Why is HushVPS selected despite rejecting the “DMCA ignored” label?
The selection uses the continuity outcome: HushVPS was still active on September 1, 2026. Its marketing position describes what it states, while the record describes the tested service’s outcome. Rejecting that phrase does not change the recorded result.
What additional cost does the dossier establish at AlexHost?
The testers report a double charge and no refund, but the transaction amounts were not recorded. The dossier identifies a concrete billing dispute without calculating a loss from the public price of R2 (Ryzen).
Provider sources
The test dataComparison protocol
One VPS per host over the same period. Actual rights-holder notices, at varying rates. Outcome recorded by the testers: service active or cut off. Policies and prices are published provider information; details of individual notice handling are unavailable.