If you interpret it that way, yeah it would be true. The problem here is that if you're not running a Bitcoin node, Bitcoin won't be trustless. You're basically relying on someone else to help you verify the transaction and blocks. You would have to run a node too and it wouldn't be fair for people to spam as much transactions as possible to occupy all your storage space.

Unless you somehow come up with a method to ensure decentralisation and redundancy with 1000 nodes, then its impossible to blame it on others running a node.

Tbh, I don't know how to interpet your question. The fees does not go to the nodes at all. Your interpretation could be somewhat logical but isn't correct.