i've gotten into discussions over wedding photography and there is a huge divide between clients and pro photographers.
the classic business model was for photographers to make money off prints. so they would not get paid for their time (which is very considerable because there are meetings with clients, shooting the event, post-processing, etc...) and instead they would own copyrights to all images, keep the negatives (or RAW in digital case) and make money off prints.
some clients are just fine with this model and will purchase prints and most likely don't care if they have a signature on them or not because they are just interested in the printed photos.
however, times have changed and as a young, and somewhat geeky guy
, i would not pay a dime for such a service. i would want to have the RAW files so that i could resize and post on my website, print both large and small - as many copies as i wish, and keep the digital negatives, not printed copies, forever.
i would also want to own the copyright to the photos because with the internet comes lack of privacy so i would want to make sure that my photos are really mine (ok, this is a gray area because owning copyright actually means fairly little but it would give me a small peace of mind).
in this case, i would expect to pay the photographer for their time rather than prints.
so getting back on topic, the OP seems to have done the right thing by providing free JPEG's and making the couple happy without screwing over the pro photographer.