Court of Appeal in the Third Appellate District ruled that releases in the ski industry do not violate unfair competition laws. There is nothing inherently unreasonable in skiers agreeing with ski equipment distributors or service providers to allocate to skiers the risk of injury from failure of a ski binding to release properly.
Skiers already assume the risks inherent in the sport.
Consumers are not denied a meaningful choice by virtue of the common use of releases. Consumers choice to ski already exposes them to a number of risks inherent in that activity. Skiing, like other athletic or recreational pursuits, however beneficial, is not an essential activity. Furthermore, even assuming an inequality of bargaining power, there is no credible evidence release agreements are a surprise to skiers. In addition, failure of customers to read or understand the agreements they sign is not the responsibility of the ski shops or distributors.