Should I own my website code?

What owning the code actually gives you

When you own the code, the website is an asset rather than a subscription. You can move it to a different host, hand it to another developer, or extend it years later. Nobody can hold it hostage over an unpaid invoice dispute or a price increase.

In practice that means the files sit in a repository you can access (often on GitHub, using version control), the hosting is in your name or transferable, and the contract says the code is yours on final payment.

Renting is a legitimate choice

On Wix, Squarespace or Shopify, you don’t own the underlying code. You own your content and domain, and you rent the platform. For a lot of small businesses that trade is perfectly sensible: low upfront cost, no technical decisions, updates handled for you.

The cost is vendor lock-in. If you leave, you take your words and images, not the site. Moving usually means rebuilding. The renting vs owning comparison lays out both sides.

Where people get caught out

The tricky case is a custom site built inside the designer’s own account, or on a proprietary system only they can edit. It looks like ownership but behaves like renting, with a single landlord. Ask where the code lives and whose account it’s in before work begins, not after.

Paying for the work doesn’t by itself transfer copyright in Canada; a written assignment in the contract usually does. This is general information, not legal advice; a lawyer can confirm what your contract gives you.

Every site I build is handed over with the code in a repository the client controls, the domain in their name, and plain notes on how it’s hosted. If they want to move on, they can. That’s not generosity. It’s what they paid for.

If you’re on a builder and happy, I wouldn’t switch just for ownership. I’d make sure the domain is yours and keep a copy of your content somewhere outside the platform.