Council of Elrond

CoE 61 wrote:*** Given that Unabated in Malice is played and resolved on the automatic-attack in question when Tidings of Bold Spies resolves, then
all effects of Unabated in Malice will be duplicated, per the text of
Tidings of Bold Spies, including the cancellation clause of Unabated in
Malice.

CoE 103 wrote:If Unabated in Malice is cancelled during the Tidings of Bold Spies attack, its full effects remain in play to be applied to the actual automatic attack during the site phase.

Given that the reasoning for this is:

There is attack and copy of attack. There is effect of Unabated in Malice and copy of this effect. Copy of "effect of the card" is not "effect of the card".

Is it even possible to get rid of the effect of Unabated on Tidings? The phrase doesn't allow you to cancel a copy of the effect of the card at all.

It is possible to get rid of the copy of effect of Unabated by making first attempt to cancel of the attack created by Tidings of Bold Spies.
Aaach, so complicated...
In other words:
Tidings of Bold Spies clones the AA and all its modifications (I'll name the modifications as "M" here for convenience).
Clones are AA1 and M1.
First attempt to cancel the AA1 removes effect of Unabated1.
Original effect of Unabated on AA remains unchanged.

Other possibility is that I don't understand your question.

That's what I don't get. There is absolutely no provision anywhere for removing the duplicated effect.

There is a provision for removing the effect of Unabated on Tidings, but according to the ruling/reasoning, there is only a copy of an effect on Tidings -- there isn't an actual effect of Unabated on the card.

I don't get too.
If X is cloned to Y along with all modifications (M), then all references that M makes to M to X are readed as M1 to Y.
Situation is the same as situation where two copies of Unabated were played on two different AA. Removing effect of first does not affect of effect second and vice versa.

I think I see what you're saying, but the situation is not the same:

Situation is the same as situation where two copies of Unabated were played on two different AA. Removing effect of first does not affect of effect second and vice versa.

There are two different cards in play, each with a separate effect.

Tidings says

This card creates one or more attacks on the company, the total of which duplicates exactly (including modifications) all automatic-attacks at the site.

If it duplicates exactly, then there is either
1) No difference between M and M1 (this has been declared as the incorrect interpretation), or
2) There is a difference, but the exact duplication of "cancels the effects of this card" rules out the possibility of affecting M1, since otherwise it will not be an exact duplicate.

In the case of two different Unabateds played on two different auto attacks, we do not have an exact duplicate. I do not see how it is the same case at all, hence my confusion.

It is juggling with words.
The Tidings of Bold Spies is inconsistent, because it, from one hand, creates attacks which duplicates exactly all automatic-attacks at the site.
From other hand these attacks are not considered automatic-attacks.
So exact copy is not so exact.
I joke...

A card can have relative (e.g. to its target) or absolute (global) effect.
If target is copied including all modifications, the copies of all effects related to the original are now related to the copy of original.
Otherwise modification could not be copied at all.
Effect of Awaken Defenders (doubling of number strikes and, making detainment AA at BH/FH normal) could not be copied, because readed in absolute manner it says about automatic-attacks only.

Unabated in Malice does not make any effects unrelated to its target, i.e. such that could affect anything besides target attack.
Opposite example is Forewarned is Forearmed, that makes attack impossible to cancel (effect relative to the original attack) and sets action triggered by passive condition (discard when such isolated attack is defeated), which is not relative to the original (does not affect the original).

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.