I don't shoot commercially or have ever done weddings or portraits. But I've always advocated putting a visible copyright on all the images I upload to the web. For the type of pictures you're referring to, a larger semi transparent copyright that would deter making a print would be better, otherwise they could just scan the print and take your copyright off. That's what I use on my sports photos on the web.

For another take on your copyright not print issue, a lot of photographers are pricing to give a CD of digital files (that can be printed) to their clients. But that's a whole other issue.

I hear from a friend - who is a top wedding shooter in San Diego - that more and more studios are charging a flat-rate that covers the shoot and initial prints, and passing on either the digital images or negatives to the customers.

They have found that follow-up print orders are so time consuming that they produce little profit in return. Time must be spent filing and storing the film, retrieving it and matching the exposures to the proofs, dealing with chatty customers when the order is placed and when it is delivered, along with the time spent getting the film to and from the lab and handling the bookkeeping the transaction generates.

This can amount to hours spent for a small order, and it just is not worth it. Once the originals are passed to the customer the transaction is done. There is also good will, and the chance they will return for shots of their next wedding.

To add to what Larry said, the studios that are still offering printing services are selling larger prints by using a digital projector to project the image at the size the customer is interested in. Then by projecting it larger, they sell larger sized prints. Obviously this doesn't work with small album sized prints though.