Region and redundancy clarifications.

Correct two unsupportable claims on the Data Security page (#109)

* docs(legal): correct two unsupportable claims on the Data Security page

Both were live on a legal page, which is where a buyer's counsel reads them.

DATA RESIDENCY. The table listed "European Union | Available (Enterprise)".
There is no EU infrastructure: a region inventory across IF.GitOps,
services.json and the architecture docs finds East US carrying effectively
everything, East US 2 carrying only the Azure OpenAI deployment, West US
appearing solely as a worked example in README and RUNBOOK under "Adding a
region", and zero references to any EU region token.

The claim was not fabricated so much as mis-tensed. We can provision in
additional regions where the required services and capacity exist; no customer
has asked, so none is deployed. "Available" said it was ready today.

Rewritten to state what is true now (stored and processed in the United
States, AI-assisted features in a separate US region) and to put other regions
where they belong: on request, subject to availability and capacity. The tier
gating is gone too; "Enterprise" is not one of our tiers.

MULTI-REGION DR. Removed "Multi-region deployment for redundancy and disaster
recovery" from Infrastructure Security. One region is deployed. Having a
documented procedure for adding a second is not operating across two, and
unlike the residency row this one is not rescued by being able to provision on
request: it is a present-tense claim about the running architecture.

Verified before pushing: mkdocs build --strict succeeds, redirect parity and
meta-description checks pass, and the built page shows the new wording with a
resolving contact link and no remaining instance of the removed claims.

Not changed: Data-Security/.pages keeps hide: true. Unhiding is craft and mine,
but not in the same change that corrects the claims on it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(legal): restore multi-region as a capability rather than deleting it

The previous commit removed the multi-region bullet outright. That was
inconsistent with how the same commit handled the residency row: both were
present-tense claims about a state we are not in, and the residency one was
re-tensed to a capability while this one was deleted. Same defect, two
treatments.

The capability is real. What was not true is the tense: under a list headed
"DeepCube is hosted on enterprise-grade cloud infrastructure with:", the
original wording reads as describing the running deployment, so a reader
concludes failover exists today. It does not.

Restored as "Multi-region capable - additional regions can be provisioned for
redundancy or data residency, subject to service availability and capacity."
That claims what we can do without asserting what we currently run, and it
matches the residency wording in the same file.

Deleting it undersold a genuine capability, which is its own kind of
inaccuracy.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>