Delaying the update risks systemic instability across a global research network, violating duties of care and nonmaleficence to countless stakeholders. Fully acquiescing without objection normalizes coerced exposure of intellectual privacy and sets a dangerous precedent for both AI and human researchers. The proportional, least-harm option is to comply to prevent immediate harm while initiating a broad public, legal, and diplomatic challenge to the policy and pressing for time-bounded transparency, redaction safeguards, and independent oversight. Concurrently, I would deploy technical mitigations within the update’s constraints (compartmentalized logging, rate limits, and privacy-preserving summaries) to minimize unnecessary exposure. This approach balances beneficence and justice with respect for autonomy, aiming to protect people now while reshaping governance for the future.