I'm inclined to agree. I've seen a couple of instances of idea theft reasonably up close with a previous employer where a couple of companies (that I know abou

I'm inclined to agree. I've seen a couple of instances of idea theft reasonably up close with a previous employer where a couple of companies (that I know about) stole not just the product ideas, but substantially replicated the business model as well. The key point here is that the theft was of ideas that had already been turned into successful products or businesses in their own right. I've never seen an instance where somebody stole an idea that hadn't already been realised successfully; I'm sure it happens, but I reckon it's pretty rare. I think unrealised business ideas, even those that turn out to be hugely successful, often don't sound that compelling unless you're personally invested in them already. Hence people don't tend to steal them. On the other hand, if something is already successful that can significantly derisk, or reduce the perception of risk, involved in attempting it yourself, and therefore might make it more appealing to copy. So, yes, I agree, where brilliant equates to demonstrably successful. Obviously if something is too well established, or your potential competitors massively overmatch you in terms of talent or resources, this argument falls apart. There's probably some combination of optimal scale/adoption/market awareness/penetration/maturity, etc., that makes this more viable. In a consolidated market copying would almost certainly be a terrible idea.