I believe the paper should be published. Disregarding whether it is “a bad thing” (as most believe) or even “a good thing” (as some might believe) that a virus could be created in a lab and be potentially the most lethal infectious agent ever experienced by humans, let’s assume that “it’s a real thing”. That is, let’s suppose that this is true.
Again, whether it’s good or bad depends on value judgments that we each make – and for now those judgments are irrelevant. If this is indeed “a real thing”, then it’s good for us to know that, even if we think that it would be a bad thing for some people to know. The only way to counteract it is to know all about it first, in order to develop and have in place countermeasures and procedures.
I agree with most everyone else that “it would be a bad thing” for such knowledge to be used for the intent of harming large populations, or mankind (or ferret-kind) as a whole. But the knowledge, that’s not a bad thing. That’s a good thing.
This is, in fact, where so many of us disagree with priests and popes and other “authorities” of all sort: we believe in acquiring knowledge, without respect to its capabilities. Priests from time immemorial have sought to quash knowledge, questioning, experimentation – science in all its forms. This is how knowledge is gotten. Sometimes the knowledge is dangerous when it’s used for “bad intent”. (It’s why we have the Nobel Prize, after all, Alfred Nobel invented dynamite, which was a useful tool for mining and the demolition that precedes construction. But dynamite was also used as a purely destructive military tool, as well. Having made his fortune in the production of dynamite for “good uses”, Nobel wanted to apologize to the world for the “other uses” to which it had been put.)