The Guardian wrote:
A certain theory of contract is that there are no ethics involved in contracts - there is just allocation of resources.
So in this case, I agree not to transfer the bib. Then I decide if I want to live under that stipulation or whether I want to breach my agreement and suffer the damages (whatever they may be). On this sort of economic analysis, ethics donāt come into play - I just determine if it is worth more to me to breach or not breach. If the RD has ālostā something by my breach, he or she can sue me to recover it.
In the end we are each āwholeā and life goes on.
Contract law is not necessarily morality, not is it criminal law, the Ten Commandments, etc. It is a business transaction designed to give some certainty to transfer or goods or services for some consideration.
Consider intentionally fouling a player in basketball - is that unethical? Very similar to intentional breach of contract.
The person participating in the event isn't a party to the contract, the original runner is. In this case, there very well may be event's insurance coverage. Who knows, maybe they submit the names, versus a total number of people for coverage.
When you utilize your USAC license for coverage at events, you have to show ID. That's where that assumption came from.
So, you might not be at issue with goods/services with the RD or the event, but the insurance for the event.
I'm guessing the reason they don't do transfers after a certain date is that they batch up the participant ID tags/numbers/database all at once. Imagine having to go edit a database 100 different times leading up to the race as each person's mind changes. You can't do it the day before the race, it has to be ahead of time and all at once.