What does imagineNATIVE's On-Screen Protocols & Pathways state about consultation, story ownership and community review, and for whom is it written?

The imagineNATIVE-commissioned guide (dated 25 March 2019, written by Marcia Nickerson) says that permission to share a gifted story can be separate from the intellectual-property rights held by its keeper (family, community or nation), that consultation is needed at the beginning and throughout, that consulting one elder does not give sign-off, and that the protocols are a living document rather than a static checklist; it gives a rough-cut community screening as one example, not a required step. Curator qualifications: The guide's description of Canadian copyright (registration and fee required; 50-year term) is not adopted; needs a primary-law check and is likely stale or inaccurate. Script-consultation/credit (p.36) and Appendix B question list (E6, E8) not re-read. Producer synthesis (consultation is insufficient without Indigenous people in key creative roles) kept as synthesis. Text only (pdftotext of curator readback); images not reviewed. Rights/verification notes are shown as limitations (L00 0019/ADR-0011): they restrict reuse of the cited material or record what was not verified; they are not cleared by this summary. Limitations: Canada-specific; protocols vary by community (source says so). Guidance, not law. [ambiguous] Do not present any checklist derived from this guide as completing consent; source explicitly rejects that use. Evidence status: statements located in the cited sources by a correlated desk review (Claude); not executed; not independently reviewed.

{
  "citations": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.ontariocreates.ca/uploads/Business_Intelligence/en/IN_Rapport02_Mars2018_SA_Fin.pdf",
      "note": "pdftotext lines 8, 31 (cover/credits); lines 514-524 ('Consent'); lines 832-837; lines 383-386; 1436; lines 1990-1995 (copyright passage)"
    }
  ]
}