AUBURN – A wife going through divorce is suing her estranged husband claiming he posted a comment on a Web site that suggested she might have had sex with underage girls at her business.

The woman filed a civil suit recently in Androscoggin County Superior Court complaining that her soon-to-be-ex had damaged her by libel, slander or defamation and inflicted emotional distress.

While libel cases are nothing new, the venue for alleged defamation in this case is only as old as the technology that allows it.

Experts say that with the advent of the World Wide Web, its easier – and faster – than ever to harm somebody’s reputation.

“That’s what makes the Internet different from the average bricks-and-mortar world,” said Christine Galbraith, an associate professor at the University of Maine School of Law in Portland.

Would-be defamers used to be challenged by print or airwaves in their efforts to make their words public. Online blogging and posting changed that. Not only is it faster to hit the send button after typing out a message, it’s also less likely to be filtered out before it’s disseminated, Galbraith said.

“The gatekeeper function at (traditional media) is no longer there,” she said.

The general interest Web site where the estranged husband allegedly posted his libelous comment is an open site, Galbraith said. It’s accessible to the public for viewing, not protected by passwords and doesn’t appear to require registration, except for posting comments.

Even then, those posting messages are not screened to determine their actual identities. They can invent names and get e-mail addresses through a host of Internet servers.

“The Internet is the same as a bulletin board in the public square,” said Bryan Dench, an Auburn attorney who specializes in advising media clients with respect to libel.

Online content open to the public is considered a publication and courts are treating it that way, he said, the same way as if it ran in a local, regional and national newspaper.

Both the person who posted comments and the operator of the Web site can be legally responsible, depending on the circumstances. Web site operators must be aware of the content to be held responsible. Or they can be held responsible if they should have known or should have exercised reasonable caution in screening the comments posted on their sites, he said. If they never checked the content posted to their sites, they could be found negligent, he said.

As the Internet becomes an integral part of our communications network, so do the lawsuits stemming from its use.

Libel actions originating from the Internet are becoming “extremely common,” Dench said. “There’s a lot of litigation arising over allegations of defamation written on blogs, Web sites and in chat rooms,” he said.

There are measures Web site operators can take to limit their exposure, Dench said, including adoption of an “acceptable use policy.” It should explain that no comments that are false or defamatory will be allowed. It should state that the operators have the right to edit or delete content that doesn’t meet the site’s standards. Operators should be able to block people from posting to its site.

Dench pointed out that a section of the federal Communications Decency Act does provide broad immunity for “interactive computer service” providers who merely publish content provided by others. Courts across the country have upheld that section as immunity for posting defamatory information, private information, false information, pornographic information, and discriminatory housing ads. But Dench said this immunity does not protect the person who provided the information.

Sigmund Schutz, a Portland attorney who represents the Maine Press Association, said one of the practical difficulties posed by libelous online content is in seeking to pinpoint where the defamatory words originated. If it happened in a foreign country, bringing a legal action could present an uphill battle, he said. Even more problematic is seeking to correct the wrong or set the record straight.

“Once it’s out there, it’s very hard to put the genie back in the bottle,” he said.

Those posting comments may not be aware that their words, intended for a local audience, could easily – and quickly – end up viewed by an international audience, Galbraith said.

“Online tools such as blogs and discussion forums give individuals the ability to quickly and easily disseminate their thoughts, feelings and opinions to a potentially wide audience,” said Aaron Smith, a research specialist at the Pew Internet and American Life Project in Washington. “Normally these sites provide a valuable function by allowing people to share ideas and expertise, but like any other communications technology they can potentially spread undesirable forms of information, such as gossip, rumors or misinformation.”