What Happens to An Idea That Gets Rejected By a Startup Funding Agency?

Knowledge and skill are fast being replaced by ability to innovate as a non-negotiable attribute that corporate recruiters look for, in prospective employers. The shift from emphasis on bulk campus recruitment to selective acquisition is already visible in the horizon. These justify existence of multiple avenues of funding available for start ups.

Idea(s) are the core of startups. Occasionally one can hear grievances about idea being poached. These point to the darker side of startups, which are seldom openly discussed. Suppose an young innovator develops an idea, but lacks access to resources (to convert it into a prototype/ product).  S/he discloses the idea to someone (a startup support agency) but fails to get a positive reply. Six months later, s/he would be disappointed to learn that somebody else has developed a prototype/ product  using the same idea. Although it would be difficult to establish, chances of unfair practices cannot be ruled out.

Under the present practice, there exists a latent potential that will increase the gap between 'genuine innovators' and 'armchair innovators'. The former has ideas and the latter, access to ideas. This is not a hypothetical probability. It can happen because, all startup funders require innovators to disclose their idea in advance. No one has time to study the fate of rejected ideas.

Strong propaganda works to instill the notion that ideas without implementation strategy are non-ideas and hence will not get purloined. However, it would be objective to view innovative idea and its implementation strategy as boat and oar respectively.

Ideas can come in two forms - patentable and non-patentable. The line that separates them is almost always thin. It is likely that 'armchair innovators' will seek to emphasize patentability of idea. 

Let the reader think over the question posed as the title of this comment.

Shouldn't something be done?

Perhaps it is time for an Innovation/ Idea Register.