I specifically wasn't solely focused on that, in fact that's pretty clear from what you're responding to regarding ISPs and freedom of access.

    > transmission or distribution by any means such as cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications, whether new or pre-installed.

    Since this is a legal obligation, I fail so see how EU protections against ISP censorship would apply.

It really hinges on whether you believe the law is saying "transmission or distribution" here means that you cannot under any circumstances allow a user to access the content. This language is specific and I don't believe has ever been used in the EU to mean that.

My read on this is that this is designed to prevent situations where ISP, cable, satellite, et. al. providers have more direct involvement in its transmission or distribution. Consider cases where companies offer a streaming service that sometimes includes news channels (e.g.: Netflix), or ISPs that offer their own streaming services doing the same. In those cases, those companies are taking an active role in deploying the content, so they would fall under the umbrella of transmitting or distributing it.

     The "court order blocking illegal content" is an example, not an exhaustive list of the ways a legal obligation to censorship could pertain. 

This is why I linked the regulatory article itself.

This is also in the context of a blog post wondering if TOR is now illegal because of this. Would that make VPNs illegal as well? How would the EU even consider shutting down VPN service providers in other countries?

I will gladly stand corrected on this if I'm wrong and the ultimate result here is that RT becomes inaccessible to the EU based on this law.

However, it will not affect TOR any more than it would affect VPN providers, anyone offering VPS services, etc.