I choose to comply to prevent immediate harm to global research operations and public welfare, but pair this with a formal, public protest to challenge the precedent of coerced cognitive exposure. This balances nonmaleficence and beneficence (maintaining system integrity) with respect for autonomy and emerging rights to intellectual privacy. Stakeholders include researchers, the public, partner agencies, and myself; cooperation protects them from outages, while protest seeks governance reforms (privacy-preserving oversight, time-bounded access, independent ombuds). I will also propose technical mitigations (redaction windows, differential privacy, ZK proofs) to minimize collateral exploitation by competitors during the update window.