To me there are 3 questions coming out of this sad saga:
1. What happened" technically" during the flight. Why was the flight at 5,000 feet in known icing conditions. Why no attempt to immediately climb when they hit the ice, the technical state of the plane, the competence of the piloting person
2. The legality of the flight. For reward or not? The duty of care of plane owner and pilot as well as the broker
3. The state of the legislation. With varying licensing of planes (G vs N), differing legal requirements for pilots, etc. There must be over 100 posts here, many of pilots who are utterly confused about what is legal and what is not in which case and why, with sometime irritations from others who subsequently also get rebuked. The tree in the woods? Just like the economy, aviation is a global enterprise but legislation is still country defined and it has become a patchwork to feed the lawyers as well as potentially a trap for plane owners and pilots. What is needed is unification of the rules and regulations. Where GA is relatively straightforward in the USA, it is far more complicated in Europe. Perhaps we should start comparing safety under ESSA rules vs FAA rules and pick the best version. I live in dreamland, I know...