I'm a little late to the party, but here is my take on the patent issue.

All patents must have detailed drawings, theories, etc. as a part of the patent application.  These by definition are in the public domain as it is necessary that they be available to ANYONE (not just a patent attorney) researching a patent.  So the publishing of the information on a patented item is not prohibited.

As an example: I decide I can improve upon this concept.  I decide to patent my changes.  The patent office rejects my application based upon this existing patent.  My application becomes public upon filing, but even though my item infringes upon another patent, I am in the clear and my drawings are "out there".

Point being, Kurt went through the same process in applying for their patent.  Since their concept is heavily based in geometry, dimensions are critical to the "theory" and will have been included in their drawings, which are in the public record.

Also, what did they patent?  The general concept (hole patterns) may have been patented and expired long ago.

Another example:  The patent for the concept of rechargable batteries for handy-talkies has long since expired.  Radio manufacturers protect their battery packs from third party sources by patenting a new physical interface between the pack and the radio.  Nothing changes electrically, but the patent for the physical mating of the two prevents third party sources from producing battery packs.  The same thing was happening with cell phones until the recent law requiring all new cell phones have the same charging interface.

In addition, a patent only protects the concept, item, etc. in the commercial realm.  An individual is free to "copy" a patent for his personal use.  Just don't transfer the item to anyone else, whether as a gift or as a sale.

Or you can "copy" it for the purpose of experiments trying to improve the concept.  So  long as you keep it in your own shop, you are safe.

This isn't to say that you won't get a letter from a patent lawyer if you do any of the above.  But a letter is not the law (unless it comes from a court).  If a lawyer were to go so far as to file suit based upon any of the above, he would most likely be sanctioned by the court as he should definitely know that his suit has no merit.

Now comes the issue of having someone else make the item for you.  I think you get into some murky waters here.  If I take a drawing to a machine shop and ask them to make the item, I can't see the machine shop being held liable for not performing a patent search on every item they are ask to make.  But money has changed hands, so the situation could get a little sticky.  A slick patent attorney would probably look for a "back door" through the myriad of ICC laws.

One last comment.  If you are a commercial shop and build a patented item for you own use, but use it in a commercial environment, there is probably a "back door" for the attorneys in that situation.

Just my opinion, and as a further disclaimer, I am not an attorney.  But I've built many "patented" items for my own use and feel comfortable in doing so.