Divorce can be unpleasant, to say the least, but if you vent your rancor or regret online, you may have more legal troubles than you need.

The judge overseeing the Vermont divorce case, Garrido v. Krasnansky, ordered the husband, William Krasnansky, to stop blogging about his wife and their marriage. Krasnansky, 51, refuses to obey the order claiming his lurid diatribes on lookatmypugs.livejournal.com are fictionalized. Moreover, he says Vermont Judge Devine has inflicted a prior restraint on his free speech in violation of the First Amendment. Krasnansky’s wife, Maria Garrido, 38, on the other hand, says her husband’ s blog defames her, constitutes harassment, and is not protected by the First Amendment.

As the internet transforms communication, we see more people taking advantage of the web as a forum. Perhaps it’s having an audience or the thrill of harnessing new technology. Or maybe we divulge all of our private thoughts and feelings to the world simply because we can. We realize that with a click of a mouse, somebody will pay attention to us. The internet has unleashed a worldwide ego fest. Even though Krasnansky may be undermining his credibility in divorce court, each of his key strokes captures a new reader. New technology zips by us leaving the law hobbling on its cane.

Without legal precedent, it’s difficult to say whether Krasnansky’s blog will survive in its present form. In any case, divorce courts do not look kindly on harassment, and Krasnansky’s claims that his accounts are fictional may not protect him if his wife seeks further legal redress. Whether or not the traditions of free speech apply, angry bloggers should consider avoiding legal confrontations by keeping their fingers off their keys and return instead to the pages of a low tech hardback journal.