No. The logic employed here is the same logic that underpins liquidation preferences. If investors don't want to fund acqui-hire outcomes, they do in fact have more tools than a counteroffer.
The best operators are always going to get the best terms, but an industry-wide concern over acqui-hires could easily manifest itself in poorer terms for everyone else.
Presumably these acquisitions happen most of the time because the startup failed, this is the situation I was alluding to where they can just double down if they think they / the startup can do better but otherwise nothing is going to make this look like they picked Instagram.
If they're trying to protect against people who quit too easily or aim too low then they made the wrong bet, they're not going to avoid this if they predefine a price or terms where it's a very mediocre OK.
The best operators are always going to get the best terms, but an industry-wide concern over acqui-hires could easily manifest itself in poorer terms for everyone else.