Is it legally and technically possible to sell Fedora PCs in Europe with Libreoffice, the codecs and the steam-devices package pre-installed?
I tried to modify the ISO but was not able to.
Moreover, I faced another issue: certain Flatpaks, like Kdenlive, are provided without codecs, rendering the application unusable. It would be preferable to include only the Flathub version.
For Flatpaks you can remove the Fedora remote and install Flathub
Thanks! I’m concerned about the legality of codecs for Nautilus thumbnails. I’ve noticed other companies sell distros with codecs in Europe without issues, but Fedora excludes them for legal reasons.
My understanding is that if you provide a system that is advertised as fedora it must meet the fedora standards for software. You are in fact redistributing fedora software and must comply with their standards. It seems likely that you may be legally able to add additional repos, but the system as installed and delivered must be vanilla fedora or you may be infringing on their restrictions and could quickly become embroiled in legalities.
A fedora installation makes it possible for the user to enable certain 3rd party repos during the first boot setup, but they are not enabled by default. Additional repos are also available for the user to enable after the installation is complete through the software manager.
Fedora restrictions are based on legal restrictions that exist where they are based (USA) and other distros have different restrictions (and possibly lesser restrictions) based on their home location.
The problem is that the atomic variants rely on layering to be usable.
@linuxkernel94 just copy uBlue. They are based off Fedora, ship premade images with lots of changes (and tbh improvements and corrections) and that legally works.
Look for where and how they mention Fedora
A workaround that is based on fedora but not tied to the base image.
I like the suggestion.
Thank you so much, @boredsquirrel and @computersavvy. I think that would be the best solution. I believe there shouldn’t be any problems making minor tweaks to Bluefin instead (such as disabling and modifying one GNOME extension). I tried to create my own image based on uBlue, but I struggled to understand the process on GitHub, even after reading the documentation. 
Same here. My builds are always failing, have to check again.
You can also have a look at blue-build if you find it hard to modify the ublue template. I’ve tested both and the end result is the same but they use different approaches: ublue template is Containerfile focussed and blue-build is more declarative.