BranditScan
Best for: The closest like-for-like replacement, and the cheapest to test. Adult-platform creators who want facial recognition and social-account removal in the same product as leak takedowns.
Pricing reality: Premium: $69/mo for 3 stagenames. Premium (annual): $690/yr for 3 stagenames. White Glove: $149/mo for Unlimited stagenames. White Glove (annual): $1490/yr for Unlimited stagenames.
What it does better: Three stage names are included in the $69/mo entry plan, where a per-username competitor would charge for each.
What makes people leave: The most detailed negative review describes de-listing standing in for removal, and manual submissions going unactioned. In a reviewer's own words: All they do is get the links delisted from Google, since 90% of the content isn't actually removed. Most of the links found are to blank pages… Plus, manual submissions are usually ignored, whether they're fake social media accounts or leaked videos on various forums. trustpilot.com on BranditScan
Verdict: Premium covers three stagenames; more than three requires White Glove at $149/mo. Both tiers advertise the same core feature set — White Glove buys stagenames, a concierge and more aggressive scanning rather than new capability. Telegram is not named anywhere on BranditScan's pricing page or its benefits page; the published social surfaces are Instagram, X and Reddit.
Bruqi
Best for: The flattest pricing in the category, and a free tier that does not expire. Price-sensitive creators with several stage names, since every paid tier covers all usernames at one price.
Pricing reality: DIY: $0/mo for Manual removals only. Side Hustle: $29/mo for All usernames. Creator Pro: $99/mo for All usernames. Top 1%: $249/mo for All usernames.
What it does better: Every paid tier covers all usernames at one price, starting at $29/mo — the flattest pricing model of the five competitors compared here.
What makes people leave: The recurring complaint is de-listing counted as removal, with the file left hosted. In a reviewer's own words: they say 399 links are delisted but when i google them they still come up (even in a new browser or incognito mode) no images have been removed from google images and it's been days. trustpilot.com on Bruqi
Verdict: Automatic removal is not part of the free tier. Scan frequency, not username count, is what separates the paid tiers: weekly on Side Hustle, daily on Creator Pro, hourly on Top 1%.
Privly
Best for: One flat $49 price for every stage name, and a trial that needs no card. Creators who want a single flat price with no tier decision to make, and who would rather buy copyright registration and platform offboarding as one-off services than as plan features.
Pricing reality: Free Trial: $0/mo for 7 days, 1 scan, up to 3 uploads. Creator Protection: $49/mo for All platforms, all content. Platform Offboarding: $499 one-time for Concierge, 12 months of cover. Copyright Registration: $299 one-time for Optional add-on.
What it does better: The flattest published price in this comparison for a full-service plan: $49/mo, in Privly's words "Same plan, every feature, no per-username surcharge, no hidden tiers".
What makes people leave: No public review record at all: Privly's Trustpilot profile carries zero reviews, so there is no third-party evidence to weigh in either direction. openDMCA is in the same position and says so. trustpilot.com on Privly
Verdict: The trial caps at one scan and three uploads. The paid plan publishes no username, platform or volume cap at all — Privly's own line is "All platforms · All content · One flat fee".
Ceartas
Best for: The high-touch option, if Rulta's Legend tier was the part you valued. Established and high-profile individual creators. The top tier is positioned at talent with a management layer rather than at a self-managed creator.
Pricing reality: Star: $69/mo for 1 creator. Elite: $169/mo for 1 creator. VIP: $349/mo for 1 creator. Platinum: $1200/mo for 1 creator.
What it does better: A published price ladder that reaches genuinely high-touch service, which most of the category does not publish at all.
What makes people leave: Per-creator pricing on every tier: an agency with a roster of ten pays ten times, and there is no published multi-creator plan. ceartas.io on Ceartas
Verdict: Pricing is per creator per month on every tier, so a roster multiplies the bill linearly. The $69 Star tier caps manual takedown requests at 300; unlimited manual requests start at $169/mo.
DMCA.com
Best for: Per-notice, not per-month. A different product for a different problem. Website owners and businesses protecting a site's contents — the page's own words are "Text, Code, Images & Graphics". Creator leak removal is not a named segment.
Pricing reality: Protection Pro — Protect with Badge: $10/mo for 1 regular website. DIY Takedowns: $10/mo for Unlimited self-filed notices. Full-Service Takedown — Standard: $199 one-time for 1-9 notices. Full-Service Takedown — Premium: $399 one-time for 1-9 notices. Full-Service Takedown — Platinum: $599 one-time for 1-9 notices. Monitoring: $10/mo for Base tier.
What it does better: The most recognised brand name in the category, and the badge product is a genuinely cheap way for a website owner to publish a visible copyright notice at $10/mo.
What makes people leave: Per-notice full-service pricing scales the wrong way for leak removal: $199 covers 1-9 notices, so a creator with hundreds of URLs faces a bill that grows with the problem. dmca.com on DMCA.com
Verdict: Full-service takedowns are priced per notice, and the cheapest per-notice rate quoted ($165) applies only to a block of 26-50. A creator whose scan returns 400 URLs is not the customer this pricing was built for.
The objections worth taking seriously
- Is this a scam, like half the category?
- Fair question, and the honest answer is that openDMCA cannot prove it with a testimonial. What it can do is publish the instrument: a notice under 17 U.S.C. §512 is the same one studios file, openDMCA acts as your authorised agent, and the policy that binds openDMCA to that role is public. Read the openDMCA DMCA policy, including the counter-notice route
- Will filing put my legal name in front of the people who leaked me?
- A valid notice has to identify a complainant, and openDMCA is the named agent on it rather than your home address. Nothing about your identity handling is left to a promise — the security page describes what openDMCA stores about you and where it goes. How openDMCA handles creator identity and account data
- Will the charge match the price on the page, and can I actually cancel?
- Every openDMCA price on the pricing page is read from the same config that drives Stripe checkout, so the number you read is the number you are charged. Cancellation is self-serve from the dashboard, with no retention call and no ticket. The openDMCA cancellation and refund terms
Leaving Rulta: the hour it takes, and the spreadsheet you should not throw away
Whichever of these you pick, the switch is roughly an hour and the hardest part is not technical.
Your spreadsheet is the asset, not the sunk cost. If you have been keeping a sheet of leak URLs and the dates you reported them — and most creators who have paid Rulta for a year have one — that sheet is the only portable record of your own case. Rulta publishes no export of takedown history, so nothing else survives the cancellation. Do not delete it, do not feel silly about it, and do not let any service tell you it is redundant. Paste those URLs into whatever you move to as manual submissions; they enter the same queue as scanned results.
The forty-five minutes that matter. Ten minutes writing down every stage name Rulta was covering. Ten minutes listing your own domains and your collaborators' so the new service excludes them before it files anything. Fifteen minutes running the new service's free scan against your main name and comparing the count to Rulta's dashboard. Ten minutes spot-checking, in a private browser window, whether the URLs Rulta reports as handled are actually gone.
What it costs. Rulta bills monthly with no contract, so the worst case is one overlapping month. Three of the four alternatives here let you evaluate at zero cost first: BranditScan states its seven-day trial needs no card, Bruqi's DIY tier never expires, and openDMCA's username scan needs no account. Use one of them before you cancel anything.
If the new scan finds less than Rulta did, stay. That is the test. Nothing on this page outranks it.
Why openDMCA is not ranked in this list, and what it would argue if it were
openDMCA wrote this page, which is exactly why openDMCA is not in the ranking above. A vendor placing itself first in its own comparison tells a reader nothing they can use, and readers and answer engines both discount it. The column in the table is there because leaving it out would be a different kind of dishonesty; the ranked positions belong to the four services openDMCA does not sell.
The argument openDMCA would make, if it were making one, is about routing rather than coverage. openDMCA routes every infringing URL through the Removal Graph — a live map of which hosts actually remove content, how fast, and through which channel — so each takedown takes the shortest path that has historically worked for that host. Every service on this page can send a notice. What differs is whether the second notice to a host that ignored the first is sent at all, or whether the URL is moved to search de-listing because the record says this host resolves below 25% over ninety days across at least five samples.
That record is the part a competitor cannot buy. The escalation ladder is a week of engineering. The corpus of resolved outcomes that tells you which rung to skip is a function of volume and time, and it only exists after the takedowns have already happened.
openDMCA also has the weakest public evidence of any service on this page: no independent review profile, no named case study, and a Host Compliance Index that is built but held back until it clears its own sample threshold. Weigh that against the mechanism honestly. A good argument from a vendor with no reviews is still an argument from a vendor with no reviews.
The estimate below uses 310 live copies across four stage names, which is the shape of the roster problem that makes per-username pricing hurt in the first place.