Another 1st Amendment "Right" case in the Age of the Internet

Let me preface this note by saying that the laws surrounding the Freedom of Speech are being reevaluated daily in this, the age of the Internet. With Internet anti-bullying legislation popping up at every turn, things are changing daily. I don't purport to have all the answers, but my opinion (below) is based on current legislation and (the one thing we have far too little of in the judicial system) common sense.

I read this article today and found it very interesting.
[Read article before continuing, otherwise you'll have no frame of reference for my opinion]

I wish this were a clear-cut issue, but I honestly can see the merit in both arguments:

I do think it is harmful to your child(ren) to bad-mouth the other parent. I, myself, have always made a conscientious effort to avoid that because it not only is detrimental to the child's opinion of that parent (and doesn't give them the opportunity to form their own opinions) but also because it damages the child psychologically. Aside from that, it's just tacky and makes a person look pathetic (many people from my high school do this on FB, and these are the people whose status updates are hidden).

However, in terms of requiring the father to take down his site, I do think that was a violation of his right to free speech (at least our modern interpretation of that concept). I see parents raising kids in detrimental conditions all the time (including the language they use), and no one has outlawed the use of specific words that breed hatred and negativity in these situations. It's a shame that we live in a society where people are so quick to post things in the Internet that they would never have had the gumption to say in real life, but this is what we have "evolved" into. My advice for the courts: If the things posted on the site were not accurate, allow the mother to file a libel suit (although she would have the burden of proving that the site was specifically aimed to her and it seems that it was done somewhat anonymously). If the accusations were accurate--well, that's a lesson to be learned: make sure you are proud of your actions daily because (unfortunately) the world--at large--may be reading about them in a matter of minutes.

As a side note:
I wonder why the girlfriend feels she has any role in this.
If the mother and father are having issues, the girlfriend should probably allow them to run whatever course they desire, but either way it is in no way the girlfriend's business. Seems to me she (said girlfriend) is simply another catty woman hellbent on causing problems and stirring drama. If the father had created and maintained the site on his own, I'd feel a lot more sensitive to his plight (after all, men are rarely treated as equal in these domestic cases).

I can tell you this assuredly: When I date a man with children (as I am now), I never get involved in the arrangements for the kids. I know some women refuse to allow their boyfriends/spouses that control (insecurities, anyone?), but I feel (and court precedent agrees) that the new mate has no say in orders such as financial support, custody, etc. I'm sure they have come to realize, just like me, that it's unhealthy and rarely based on the child(ren)'s best interest; far too often, it's simply an avenue for the new mate to cause problems and reek havoc with no basis of merit.

[Steps off soapbox]

What are your thoughts?
Any experience with this yourself?
How do you think the courts should have handled it?

Update: I just went to the site and checked it out. This is NOT a site devoted to the plight of a father to be treated equally under the law; this site's primary purpose, it would seem, is to belittle the exwife, not to discuss the injustices of the judicial system, nor to offer advice to anyone subjected to those injustices. While that doesn't change my opinion on the legality of his right to speech, it does make me far less sypathetic towards the father and backs my notion that he and the girlfriend (or wife?)  are simply being bitter and using the site as a means to reek havok.
The site was, quite frankly, very pathetic and immature, in my opinion.