Below I emphasize a commentary by Annalee Newitz that applies to (2) as discussed in my first post on this thread.
In "Dangerous Terms: A User's Guide to EULAs", she says, in regard to anti-reverse-engineering clauses, such as (2), that:
"These kinds of anti-reverse-engineering clauses – which are incredibly common – seek to undermine the lawfulness of many types of reverse-engineering, ... and thus wind up discouraging innovation, creativity, and exploration.
Section 4 of the Windows XP Home Edition EULA14 manages to acknowledge federal copyright law while nevertheless trying to impress upon consumers that they really shouldn't reverse-engineer anyway:
'LIMITATIONS ON REVERSE ENGINEERING, DECOMPILATION, AND DISASSEMBLY. You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.
Here, Microsoft has expressly nodded to fair use protections for reverse-engineering, but unless those reading the EULA are familiar with how 'such activity' is 'permitted by applicable law,' they are likely to get the impression that most kinds of tinkering are unlawful."
I am emphasising this commentary to make it clear that reverse engineering is legal in some cases. Additionally, law supercedes any EULA if there is a conflict between the two. In this regard, Ms Newitz mentions the "fair use protections for reverse-engineering." Without being specific, the law and related court decisions tend to support the "fair-use doctrine" in the context of the reverse engineering of computer software.