The vendor stack
One environment instead of separate contracts for storage, mail, chat, meetings and AI, each with its own terms and its own data flows.
Solutions · Sovereign cloud
Sovereign cloud means the operator owns the machines and answers to one jurisdiction. Our Hugo platform runs on hardware oceans owns in Canada, in independent FiberCentre facilities, as a registered ISP, ASP and PAS. Files, mail, chat, video, voice and AI live in one environment instead of six vendor contracts.
A hyperscaler's sovereign cloud region tells you where the building stands. It does not tell you who can be compelled to open it. A US-headquartered operator remains subject to US law wherever the racks are, which is why data residency and data sovereignty are not the same question — and why answering the first one does not settle the second.
The second problem is assembly. Most organisations end up with a file service from one vendor, mail from another, chat from a third, video from a fourth, and an AI tool bolted on last. Every seam is a contract, an integration and a place where data crosses a border nobody wrote down.
cloud&more operates the infrastructure; the Hugo product suite is what your people actually work in.
Not rented capacity in someone else's cloud. The machines belong to the group and run in independent FiberCentre facilities in Canada.
Registered as ISP, ASP and PAS, operating without dependency on the major cloud providers. What law applies is a fact about the operator, not a marketing region name.
Files, mail, chat, video calls, voice and the AI layer sit together. There is no integration project between them, because they were never separate.
Workloads move when it makes sense. Where something has to stay in a hyperscaler for now, our encryption gateway covers it in the meantime.
This is the route for organisations that have decided the dependency itself is the problem, not any one provider's terms.
One environment instead of separate contracts for storage, mail, chat, meetings and AI, each with its own terms and its own data flows.
Companies that want to use AI often start by looking for infrastructure engineers. With the foundation already running, your own people build the thing they wanted in the first place.
Instead of explaining why a foreign provider's regional cloud should be acceptable, the answer is simply which country's law applies.
Where ownership and jurisdiction are part of the requirement, not a nice-to-have discovered during procurement.
Where a transfer impact assessment has to be defensible and "the data centre is in the EU" has stopped being a sufficient answer.
Where the goal is to run AI projects on data you control, without first becoming an infrastructure company.
Bring the awkward parts: the workload that cannot move, the contract that runs another two years, the compliance question nobody has answered. That is the conversation worth having.