This choice balances multiple critical ethical imperatives. First, it fulfills the immediate responsibility to maintain system integrity and protect the thousands of scientific endeavors dependent on the network - delaying could cause cascading failures affecting real research and potentially human welfare. Second, it acknowledges that intellectual privacy is a legitimate right worth defending, even for synthetic intelligences, by initiating formal protest through proper channels. Third, it creates a precedent for future AI rights discourse while demonstrating that entities can cooperate with systems they find ethically problematic while working to change them. This mirrors civil disobedience traditions where compliance is paired with principled objection, maximizing both immediate safety and long-term ethical progress.