I see a lot of models that do component video upconversion, but it seems that DVI with HDCP (I think they call it HDMI) is going to be the standard from here on out in the HD digital TV age.

HDMI has pretty much replaced DVI as it carries a two-way signal and digital audio too. Not to mention being cheaper to manufacture in cable as well as socket.
Only the higher-end models will feature this when they hit the receiver rears in the next generation or two, despite costing less than DVI.
Question is: Why would you want to run your video through your receiver now that the better universal remotes (Hi Harmony) offer discrete codes for your TV inputs allowing users to benefit from removing the middle-man (receiver switching) who invariably reduces picture quality (to some extent) by adding a link to the chain? You aren't compromising on convenience with discrete codes, so no need to compromise on performance, particularly with High Definition.

HDMI has HDCP built into the spec. DVI does not.

But they're making all HDMI sets compatible. The cable is just a carrier of the digital signal which can carry lots of digital information including HDCP.
DVI not being able to carry sound was a loser for the industry. HDMI carrying DD was another bonus.

I figured they were primarly pushing HDMI because of the fact it had HDCP in the spec so it just makes pushing copy protection easier.

how do I get the sound to go to my receiver instead so that I can watch in surround sound?

either coaxial, or most likely optical.