I found this interesting.

6. You have no copyright protection for your photos until you register them.
Copyright exists in your photographs at the moment you click the shutter. While you do not have to register your photos with the U.S. Copyright Office for them to be protected by copyright, there are many reasons to register them. When a photo is not registered with the U.S. Copyright Office prior to an infringement (or within three months of the first publication of the photo), a copyright owner may recover only “actual damages” for the infringement (pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 504 (b)), instead of statutory damages. Courts usually calculate actual damages based on your normal license fees and/or standard licensing fees, plus profits derived from the infringement, if not too speculative.
Note also that to file a lawsuit in the U.S. for copyright infringement, the photo must be registered.
The U.S. Copyright Office now allows for registration of certain copyrighted works online using the eCO system. Currently, you may use eCO to register any number of unpublished images, a single published image and multiple images that were all first published in the same “unit of publication.” Registrations of a group of separately published photographs at this time must be submitted on Form VA only, with optional use of continuation sheet Form GR/PPh/CON. The Copyright Office expects that these group registrations will be allowed using the eCO system soon.

http://betterdigitalphotography.blogspot.com/2010/11/top-10-misconceptions-about-photography.html

I found this interesting.

Quote

6. You have no copyright protection for your photos until you register them.
Copyright exists in your photographs at the moment you click the shutter. While you do not have to register your photos with the U.S. Copyright Office for them to be protected by copyright, there are many reasons to register them. When a photo is not registered with the U.S. Copyright Office prior to an infringement (or within three months of the first publication of the photo), a copyright owner may recover only “actual damages” for the infringement (pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 504 (b)), instead of statutory damages. Courts usually calculate actual damages based on your normal license fees and/or standard licensing fees, plus profits derived from the infringement, if not too speculative.
Note also that to file a lawsuit in the U.S. for copyright infringement, the photo must be registered.
The U.S. Copyright Office now allows for registration of certain copyrighted works online using the eCO system. Currently, you may use eCO to register any number of unpublished images, a single published image and multiple images that were all first published in the same “unit of publication.” Registrations of a group of separately published photographs at this time must be submitted on Form VA only, with optional use of continuation sheet Form GR/PPh/CON. The Copyright Office expects that these group registrations will be allowed using the eCO system soon.

http://betterdigitalphotography.blogspot.com/2010/11/top-10-misconceptions-about-photography.html

I'm actually helping a friend of mine with a copyright infringement case, I'm an attorney. Anyways, if you take good pictures, and want protection don't place them on the internet without registering them, first. If not you have very little chance of recovering any damages in court. There are some intricacies where you may be able to get an injunction, but damages come from an image that's been registered. The registration doesn't cost that much, and as it states above, you can register multiple images under one bulk registration to cut down on costs. It's a tough world out there, just don't post a pic until it's registered if you want protection.

Ive been there man. Any company can use a photo of mine for advertisement if its not registered. And that creative commons thing only means that nobody can profit from it but they can still use it.

I publish all my photography under a Creative Commons license.  There are several; the one I use allows other people to profit from my work, and to make modifications too.  I do demand attribution, and I do still own copyright, so if I did see my work on a bill board somewhere, without my name in small print on or near it, I'd talk to them (and if they came up with no remedy, a solicitor) about getting that corrected.

Then again, I'm an amateur.  Literally, that means I do it for the love of it.  If somebody ever pays me to take photographs for them, they're going to get Creative Commons licensed work (and they'll know that long before they agree on a fee).  My time's worth money to me, not the end product.

That's ugly, man! Not the photo, but the whitemark on it. You should better not post an image at all. If you don't feel like sharing your images, just keep them for yourself. You don't need to insult other viewers with that ugly thing.
You know, there was a thread my a local photography forum, in which I was regular before they deleted my account, in which photographers and the like shared their images of my country. The topic title was "Show us how you want our children to remember our homeland", emphasizing on nature and the like. People posted great images, then a moron showed up and posted one with a comment like that: "Here you go one from my Hassy" and attached an image with copyright marks allover it. Nothing special, just an otherwise nice 800x600 image, but it was hardly distinguishable due to the many copyright notes......I asked him "So, Gena, is this how you want our children to remember our homeland - stamped over with copyright notes?!?" He didn't seem to understand my point. I sometimes think you should not ruin a photo by adding such ugly inscriptions on it. Put yous name on the frame if you must.

You know, there was a thread my a local photography forum, in which I was regular before they deleted my account, in which photographers and the like shared their images of my country.

I agree that posting lower-res images is a good idea. Sure it can still be ripped off and posted on somebody's blog, but it will not be used for anything more serious (hopefully). Of course, I hesitate to post anything publicly that includes faces--you never know whether someone will Photoshop it into something unsavoury. 

And what did you do to get yourself booted off that forum, adash?

Do note that copyright law varies from country to country. In Australia copyright is automatic and there is no registration required (or even a body to register copyright). You do not have to mark your work or do anything else.

For Australia, you can find information about copyright here... http://www.copyright.org.au/

The legislation is the Copyright Act and you can find it here... http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca1968133/index.html#s35

The only time you don't own copyright of your own work in Australia is:

1. When you take photographs as part of your employment. The copyright belongs with the employer.

2. When you accept payment for a commission to take photographs. The copyright belongs to the person ordering the work unless there is an agreement otherwise (i.e. in the contract you have for the work).

The above is under copyright legislation in Australia. It may well be different if you live in another country.

If you have issues about copyright or need to have a contract drawn up, you should contact a copyright lawyer or similar in your local area rather than rely on advice posted in an internet forum.

Do note that copyright law varies from country to country. In Australia copyright is automatic and there is no registration required (or even a body to register copyright). You do not have to mark your work or do anything else.

For Australia, you can find information about copyright here... http://www.copyright.org.au/

The legislation is the Copyright Act and you can find it here... http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca1968133/index.html#s35

The only time you don't own copyright of your own work in Australia is:

1. When you take photographs as part of your employment. The copyright belongs with the employer.

2. When you accept payment for a commission to take photographs. The copyright belongs to the person ordering the work unless there is an agreement otherwise (i.e. in the contract you have for the work).

The above is under copyright legislation in Australia. It may well be different if you live in another country.

If you have issues about copyright or need to have a contract drawn up, you should contact a copyright lawyer or similar in your local area rather than rely on advice posted in an internet forum.

This is similar in the USA also, It belongs to the original creator from moment of conception. With Newspapers though, it belongs to the staff photographer. The paper has exclusive 1st time publication rights only. After that, they have to ask permission with the photographer with a release to use it more than once. The Photographer can sell or rent the photograph as much as they want after the paper publishes it once.