Unless you state a license, the default is exclusive copyright, so readers have no clear permission to reuse your snippets beyond what law allows. Put a license on your docs sample code, say so near the examples, and check with counsel for specifics. This post is general information, not legal advice.
What the default says
The Choose a License guide explains that when you make a creative work, which includes code, it is under exclusive copyright by default. Unless you include a license that specifies otherwise, nobody else can copy, distribute or modify the work without risk of legal trouble. It adds that publishing on a code hosting site grants others certain rights under the site terms, such as viewing and forking, but those terms are not enough for the collaboration people usually want.
For docs, this has a practical meaning. Your tutorial invites readers to copy a snippet into their product. Without a stated license, the invitation has no clear terms.
Why this is a security topic, too
Readers who are unsure about the terms copy the code anyway, or they avoid your sample and write something from memory, which is often less safe. A clear permissive license encourages them to use the reviewed, secure example. A missing one pushes them toward worse sources. See GitHub repo has no license: can I use it for the reader's side.
There is also a supply chain angle. Sample code that lands in a customer's product becomes part of their software inventory. Knowing its license and origin helps them record it correctly.
What to decide and publish
| Item | Decision |
|---|---|
| License for code snippets | Choose one with your legal team, often a permissive one for samples |
| License for prose and images | May differ from code; state it separately |
| Where it is stated | Footer of the docs site, the sample repository, and near the first snippet |
| Attribution wording | Say whether readers must keep a notice |
| Contributions | Say what license applies to code contributed to the docs |
| Third party snippets | Do not paste code from other sources without checking their terms |
Steps
- Ask legal which license suits your samples and whether prose and code should differ.
- Add a license file to every sample repository and a short statement to the docs site.
- Add a license identifier comment to example files if your team uses one. See SPDX license identifier tag how to.
- Write contribution guidelines that say contributions are accepted under the same terms.
- Audit existing snippets for code you copied from elsewhere, including chat answers and forums, and replace anything of unclear origin.
- Tell readers in one sentence what they may do: copy, modify, ship.
Be careful with the claims
Do not describe snippets as "free to use" unless a license says so. Do not imply the license covers your product, your API or your trademarks. Each of those is a different question.
Safeguard's dependency scanning and SBOM generation help teams keep an inventory of what ships with their products, including the open source components behind sample code. The free scan is at https://gold.safeguard.sh/scan.
Quick check
Does publishing code on a public site make it free to reuse?
Not by itself. According to Choose a License, site terms allow viewing and forking but are not enough for most reuse. A license is how you grant more.
Should prose and code share a license?
Not necessarily. Many teams license them separately. Ask your legal team.
Sources
Last reviewed: 19 October 2026.
