Play judge and jury. Does Carrie Prejean's case have any merit?

According to Miss California Pageant Rules & Regulations, subsequent to and conditionally with the Miss USA (a subsidiary of Miss Universe) contest it stipulates:

* "Must be willing to release, unconditionally and forever, any claim against Miss Universe L.P. LLLP, Its parent and affiliated or related companies and their respective officers, directors, partners, employees, agents and assigns, which they may have by virtue of their participation in their state pageant, or by any use of their name, likeness, voice, and/or biography in connection with their state pageant, including use in promotional and advertising material.

* "Must understand and agree that all issues as to eligibility shall be determined by Miss Universe, L.P. LLLP, and they must agree to abide by that determination both as to themselves and other applicants."

At what point does a "game contestant" have a contractual obligation as would AN EMPLOYEE for which must be compensated (usually monetary) as a form of rendering employee-type services? The tertiary objective of qualifying as a contestant is to secure advertiser sponsorship, not as an employee with Miss Universe, L.P. LLLP.

Notwithstanding a contractual relationship... what merit does one have to file a civil tort lawsuit seeking compensation after agreeing to and signing such agreement that the contestant "must understand and agree that all issues as to eligibility shall be determined by Miss Universe, L.P. LLLP, and they must agree to abide by that determination both as to themselves and other applicants"?