I don't think PB can affect the private UO server commnunity much,mostly because it can easily be removed for private servers(3-4 code patches maybe).
A as most serious(?) anti-gamehacking systems it works like this : 1)the game loads the security system 2)the game checks if its working 3)the security system provides authorization codes(generally dynamic or by request) to the server. All that needs to be done is to remove the first 2 feats from the client and not implement server-side auth in RunUO.
However it might affect the devs ability to reverse the code(like see what new packets/feats were added in the new client version) as these systems generally try blocking debuggers/loggers/sniffers/api spys/etc.
In my opinion such systems are not even needed for games like UO,because these games have a solid design and the client doesnt play an important role(well, of course there are macro programs,utils,plugins to make things faster,but considering those as cheats is subjective,since they arent true exploits). Games like CounterStrike,Gunbound,MapleStory,etc which have p2p design need those systems(for example gb sends the amount of gold won to the server) to prevent cheating(probably reduces the cheaters by 70%).
Regarding the screenshot feat, i do think that's an invasion of privacy and i once accidentally discovered an SS of a user while typing his password when connecting to some CS server, so even if they actually SS only the game,it still invades privacy.I fully reversed one of these security systems(not PB,nprotect gameguard),and the info sent to the server includes,username,pc name,most of hardware config,list of processes,modules,ingame username,time,hacks detected,certain apps which were installed ,among other things.
Another problem are system drivers , almost all serious anti-cheat system use system drivers to prevent hacking(anti-hook/etc),however those drivers can also easily crash the users pc(they operate under ring0 , in kernel memspace).The behavior is basically the same as what kernel-rootkits do.(userland as well).Also a crash in kernel-mode means system-crash/restart. These things are quite common for protections like nProtect GameGuard, i have not looked into PB itself,but i'm assuming its rather similar.(at least from what i've read/heard).
Razor/EasyUO probably wont be supported because if someone releases a bypass/patched pb , a new pb update will just get issued that will detect those tools(or udpate encryption so old ripped one doesnt work). This
will probably force working mods of these utils underground because publishing them will only result in a pb update/pb crypt algo update(if more serious bypass is made).
So to conclude i would say that such a system is not suitable for games like UO,and only creates problems for the users(crashes,false positives,etc) ,also it doesnt stop determined hackers.
If the RunUO/Razor devs need to reverse the client's code,they might have to rip the client/server auth scheme and use that instead of PB,but i don't think that will be a major problem for them if they'll need to do it
