#darna

Darna is perhaps the most popular 'komiks' comicbook character in The Philippines, and her tv shows are unsurprisingly among the most highly regarded of the past 25 years. Yet Angel Locsin's 2005 Darna, and Marian Rivera's 2009 follow-up series, have never been released on physical media or any streaming platform. By contrast, Jane De Leon's 2022 series is widely available on both advertising-based and subscription-based services. Why are the iconic Locsin and Rivera interpretations so overlooked?

Their significant episodes count and soap-like format surely make them ideal for binge-watching on a streaming platform -- but the reason for their absence may be quite simple: intellectual property rights.

License to thrill

It all comes down to who owns Darna, who has license to use her, and what that license permits.

While digging into the history of the Darna tv shows it is impossible to ignore the work of Cherish Aileen Brillon, currently an associate professor in the Department of Broadcast Communication at the University of the Philippines Diliman. Prof. Brillon is an academic who has authored several papers on the popular superheroine's adaptation to cinema and tv screens. One particular paper, the functionally titled Darna and Intellectual Property Rights (published in 2007, not too long after the Angel Locsin series finished airing), gives a few insightful details on the Ravelo family's control of the character.

As one might expect, the Ravelo family retained the rights to Darna after the passing of her creator, author Mars Ravelo, in 1988. Under current international copyright conventions these rights will extend up to 2038, fifty years after Ravelo's death, and grant Ravelo's surviving family considerable control over future works featuring the heroine.

According to Prof. Brillon's 2007 paper the Ravelo family insist that they have a creative voice in any Darna tv or movie. At least one representative from the family must be on the production team, with the power of script and storyline approval. The family can also veto any actor playing one of the iconic cast of Darna characters. This is ostensibly to ensure Darna's brand isn't tarnished by the real-world reputation of any actor connected to the character.

The look of the character also has to be approved by the Ravelo family. Eagle eyed viewers of the Jane De Leon show will have noticed that Darna's iconic costume changing subtly from shot-to-shot in early episodes. This was because a small amount of filming with Jane in costume was already in-the-can before the family gave their approval to the final costume design. The production had unfortunately gambled on using a costume variant that was ultimately rejected by the family.

As Brillon points out, the look of the Darna character is important because the Ravelo family do not own the rights to the original Darna artwork created by artist Nestor Redondo. As such, any costume design for contemporary versions of Darna, on screen and in print, has to be sufficiently different to Redondo's original komiks costume so that the Ravelo family can claim sole ownership of the character's image.

By the way, if you're wondering why the modern Jane De Leon series is called Mars Ravelo's Darna, Brillon explains that the Ravelo family insist that the author's name must appear ahead of the Darna name in any title captions. If you look carefully you'll see it in small print hovering over the official logos of both the 2005 and 2009 shows. The 2022 show's producers simply incorporated Ravelo's name into the official name of the show itself.

Old shows in the modern age

Although Prof. Brillon's paper doesn't specifically address the issue of Darna's licensing on streaming services -- it was written only shortly after the 2005 series finished, after all -- it isn't difficult to speculate how subsequent licensing deals would have frozen out series licensed under expired agreements. The classic shows in 2005 and 2009 were produced under license by GMA, but that license subsequently lapsed and rival network ABS-CBN acquired the rights, going on to create 2022's Mars Ravelo's Darna tv show.

The GMA deal likely specified where it was allowed to exhibit its Darna's shows, and for how long. With GMA no longer having the Darna license it is probably currently unable to continue to exploit the series. So the tapes are left to gather dust on an archive shelf, waiting for the day when the legal circumstances may change.

But this may happen sooner rather than later -- for very unfortunate reasons.

License denied

ABS-CBN has been around in various forms since the 1940s, with the ABS-CBN name first being used on television in the early 1960s. Owned by various generations of the Lopez family, the so-called Kapamilya Network (network of the family) grew to be at one point the biggest free-to-air broadcaster in The Philippines. But in the 2000s its bid to renew its government issued broadcast license, granting it power to use the airwaves, stalled amidst opposition from Presidents Benigno Aquino III and Rodrigo Duterte, the latter of whom claimed bias in the political coverage of the network. In March 2020 ABS-CBN were finally denied a license by the Duterte government -- a move that was widely criticised, with Amnesty International Philippines calling it "another nail in the coffin of press freedom". Their access to the airwaves was immediately revoked, forcing the company to rely on cable and streaming platforms.

More recently, in April 2026, an alleged feud within the Lopez family has raised questions about the future of ABS-CBN. Reports suggest that at the heart of the dispute is the authorisation of a large cash injection needed to keep the struggling network afloat. Although ABS-CBN made some progress in adapting to the loss of its broadcasting license, it has struggled to regain the audience and influence it once had prior to that 2020 shutdown.

Many in The Philippines and beyond expressed dismay at the suggestion that the once dominant broadcaster might vanish entirely, with former Darna herself, Angel Locsin, adding her voice to the outcry. It would seem, for now, that the feud has been settled by the expulsion of the family member proposing the shutdown from the company's board. But the so-called Kapamilya Network still faces a tough challenge as it continues its fight to regain access to the airwaves.

So how might ABS-CBN's woes affect the ability of GMA to exploit its old Darna shows?

While we don't know the exact terms of the 2004 deal between GMA and the Ravelos, it seems likely that the 2005 and 2009 shows are embargoed until either the ABS-CBN deal expires, and/or GMA strikes a new deal with Darna's owners. Even in 2038, when Darna enters the public domain, the tv shows will remain under copyright. Creative works using the character under license (such as movies and tv shows) have their own independent copyright.

However, if ABS-CBN surrenders or sells the Darna license before its full contract term is complete, the most obvious rival that might pick the rights up would be GMA. If GMA did indeed regain the license to Darna early, this might unlock their ability to exploit their old Darna shows on modern streaming platforms.

When researching lost media, it is always a good strategy to be weary of popular wisdom published online.

Case in point: recently GMA have started to upload Super Klenk onto one of their YouTube channels. The 1999 series, classed as lost media for a couple of decades, starred Ara Mina as the titular heroine, and was often said to have had 13 episodes. This was proven wrong when a 14th episode was recently uploaded, and indeed contemporary tv schedules suggest there may be as many as 18 episodes in total.

Another lost media series is the Lorna Tolentino 1977 show, Darna, based on the popular pinoy superheroine. This show was the first time Darna had appeared on television, and was apparently a response to the ratings success of American superhero shows such as Wonder Woman and The Bionic Woman. Popular wisdom says that the Darna series only had one or two episodes, but an interview with Lorna Tolentino herself suggests that she filmed as many as 12 episodes.