Another thought. Suppose Poolside sells 20,000 units of his gizmo, and it's me that has the crash causing the blind kids to die a firey death. IF the plaintiff's lawyer found out that they'd sold the gizmo to you for the same price as I'd paid for it, without requiring you to agree to the terms, with the exact language, he could argue that Poolside got no benefit for the limitiation of liability in his terms, since he was willing to sell the product to you for the same price without you agreeing to the terms. Therefore, that clause isn't an enforceable element of the contract since Poolside placed no value on it, therefore Poolside may be willing to assume liability for all of the parts that he's sold.
While that's tenuous, it is something the plaintiff's lawyer could present, and the only way Poolside could counter that is to pay an attorney to defend the company.