There is hiding information and not collecting it to begin with.

    void handleEula()
    {
      auto eulaAccepted = readEulaAcceptedFile();
      if (!eulaAccepted)
        eulaAccepted = promptForEulaAcceptance();
      writeEulaFile(eulaAccepted);
    }

This function reads a file from disk and writes back to it every time. If filesystem write audits aren't enabled there is no way to determine if the most recent write of "true" was the only write.

> If the car refuses to work without the EULA being accepted or rejected, proof of its movement would be sufficient to show repeated rejection.

If the car refuses to work without the EULA being accepted then it wouldn't move. If some functionality was enabled or disabled by accepting the EULA then you would have to show that the functionality was never enabled based on secondhand sources... which would be difficult. Proving something didn't happen is infinitely more difficult than proving something did. Many systems are not designed to handle that level of introspection.

All I'm saying is that the cute legal theory of "I rejected this N times therefore that one time I accepted it is invalid" falls apart for me when I consider that the user would have to prove they never did something, except that one time. Good luck.