Dear Physics Girl,
It is an abuse of the English language to call any machine perpetual motion when every true machine perpetually uses technique to harness free energy.
Take the lever of Archimedes. It is not perpetual, because we can explain it. Yet, it harnesses free energy of leverage to move objects heavier than what we could otherwise move. It is perpetually capable of doing this provided we don't stop for tea and the lever doesn't break! Butt it is definitely not a perpetual motion machine, because we can explain it using common principles of mechanical dynamics.
Just because energy is for free, doesn't mean we have to bad mouth devices we cannot explain.
Stanley Meyer's Dune Buggy made synthetic ammonia on demand by blending hydrogen |split from water| and mono-atomic nitrogen |from his air intake| by first ionizing these two gases with a high voltage positive charge in the vicinity of 70,000 volts - just like Herman Anderson did to his modified ICE (internal combustion engine).
Petros Zografos, Peter Painter, of Greece bubbles air through his electrolytic chamber to fulfill the 1807 quote of Sir Humphry Davy in which "electrolytic hydrogen will combine with nitrogen in the presence of water, while ordinary hydrogen will not."
Barbosa and Leal's Earth Captor could just as easily capture its Earth energy by magnetizing a very large mass of iron and use that as one plate of a capacitor to create a voltage difference with another iron plate much smaller than the first (through the use of the magneto-motive force) without using any watts, or the Earth, to do this.
We could go on and on with free energy examples which can be explained with common knowledge and, thus, dispel the notion that every machine designed to be against the profit motive of vested interests does not have to suffer the indignity of mislabeling via abuse of English.
In response to...
In response to...