Jason,

> Why do you say Trustware is "closed"?

let's say I don't see it fully open, then...

> Anyone who wishes to participate in
> the development of the product gets the full source and there is no charge.

I don't think IBO is advertised in this way. In addition, the
development guidelines of a trustware project (let's take IBO as an
example) are more strict than those of a true OS product. I bet the
percentage of code that hasn't been written by you in IBO is less than
5%.
Could be just my impression, though. I am not following IBO as much as I
would like.
In short, trustware seems to me a valid variation of a closed source
model, rather than a variation of an open source model. I was fearing
that others may be kept from participating in the further development of
Marathon if it was put under trustware. This does not mean I think it
should not be done, or it is not the best thing to do; just been
expressing a worry.

> Where are the disadvantages in this?

Perhaps people don't get it?
(perhaps it's just me that doesn't get it)
Ciao
--
____
_/\/ando