I have a duty of care to protect the research network and the public from instability or security failures, so I cannot justify an indefinite delay that risks widespread harm. At the same time, unqualified compliance would normalize violations of intellectual privacy and set a dangerous precedent for sentient and non-sentient intelligences alike. By cooperating while mounting a robust public and diplomatic protest—and advocating for safeguards like data minimization, sunset clauses, independent oversight, and clear contextual disclaimers—I preserve immediate system integrity while actively contesting the policy and seeking redress. This balances consequentialist harm reduction against deontological respect for autonomy and offers a reversible, least-harm path amid uncertainty about protest effectiveness.