Jack - US Sailing forbids the types of waivers you posted. Rule 82 (a US Sailing prescription) does not allow Hold Harmless or Indemnification agreements as a condition of entry.
Matt,
I see that you are correct as usual. I am curious, however, as to why?
-------------
I was on the Legal Committee of US SAILING when this was instituted (and I am not a lawyer). The term "waiver" is somewhat generic. But again in another thread I found it easier to break it down into pieces -
INDEMNITY, INDEMNIFY:
US SAILING found this type of terminology to be, 1. Contrary to public opinion, 2. Dangerous for anyone to sign. Why? You sign one of these and enter an event. A boat flips and skipper and crew are trapped underneath and die. You pack up and go home saddened by this event. Down the line you are served by a process server. What? By agreeing to indemnify an event, you are agreeing to participate in any loss in the event. When the two spouses of the two lost sailors sue the event, you have agreed to defend the event and become part of the lawsuit. You will be there with the insurance company, who may even try to use this indemnity agreement against you and recoup their costs for this event. Can you see why this is bad for public policy? [I would say that an indemnity can be more focused which can be a good thing, but with the indemnity contracts the Legal Committee reviewed, most were so broad that they made the sailors responsible for anything that happened at an event and as a result of this, found it better just to outlaw them all].
HOLD HARMLESS
Depending on how this is worded, it can follow the lines of the same problems as the Indemnity or Indemnify agreement above. As a result, US SAILING likes to see these banned to, to prevent sailors from taking on financial risk that was never their responsibility to begin with.
ASSUMPTION OF RISK
This is a "doctorine" which the lawyers felt did not need to be included in the ban, because it either doesn't get much use, or it hasn't been an effective tool (I forget which). They didn't see the need to include it in the ban as a result.
WAIVER
US SAILING actually doesn't mind the use of Waivers. What these do is simply say if you get injured on your own, you won't come after the club for your problem. Isn't that what you want? Now if the Race Committee boat runs you down, that wasn't an injury you sustained on your own and you would be eligible to collect from the club. Isn't that what you want?
I have simplified things greatly, and I am sure some legal beagles would get very technical with this stuff and pick it to pieces, but these were my general understandings of why these were needed.
INSURANCE
The second part of what they advise is related to what I do. As the clubs have the chance that they could get sued by yours, or your crews injuries, the Regatta Liability insurance is a key piece to their efforts to ban the Indemnity, Hold Harmless and Assuption of Risk agreements as it is very affordable and provides a very good deal at low premiums and protects the clubs from the potential of lawsuits from these injuries.
http://www.david-agency.com/signal/index.htmSo the idea is, make the sport financially safe for competitors, and make it safe financially for the clubs as well.
