Here's the certification for the vehicle that is required to operate it in the US, where it has to be renewed every three years whether flown commercially or purely as a hobby. Ironically it is probably more stringent than building it large enough to carry yourself, so long as it can be controlled from within rather than remotely. Thinking being that if you're up there yourself it's less likely to go AWOL with a pilot on board than if it ever loses radio contact with whomsoever is flying it from the ground.
A second reason for the relative laxity of the piloted as against unpiloted ~ as divulged to me whilst there ~ was that the comparatively stricter constraints on drones dating from their introduction assisted greatly in handing the global market to China. This a mistake that the FAA were reluctant to repeat with people-carrying devices, at least at the level of private ownership.
The distinct problem with designs like the flying phone-box is that it is ideally suited to moving individuals over a short distance for hire. This in turn makes it a commercial operation with all of the certification requires associated with that, most places in the world. As a result capital investment is flowing toward flying taxis that seat between two and six people, as you might as well be slaughtered for a sheep as for a lamb.
This makes personal air vehicles (PAVs) like the Jetson One more likely to be funded by private individuals than corporations, at least in the formative stages. In truth this has ever been the case whether involving the hot-air balloon, airplane or helicopter. each of these struggled between attracting the military on the one hand and people with money to burn on the other at the earliest stage of evolution, though you'd never guess it as you sit back with a gin and packet of peanuts on route for Disneyland.
