请求英文达人帮我翻译一下这两段英语呀

Question

请不要随便套用些翻译网站或软件机械翻译，谢谢。
When I wrote about this deal in 2008, I noted that Delaware did not have a remedy of oppression; this is a heightened standard of review for inequitable actions by majority shareholders in small, privately held corporations. There is some good commentary out there analyzing this case on oppression grounds. (For detailed commentary along these lines, see this analysis by Prof. Gordon Smith .) This may be true, but the typical remedy of oppression is a buyout or a dissolution — an escape for the shareholder.

Here, eEay is stuck in its position if it does not sell. Delaware courts will still regulate the company to the extent that Mr. Buckmaster and Mr. Newmark may try again to take punitive action against eBay under corporate law rules that regulate self-dealing. These standards will only be triggered if Mr. Buckmaster and Mr. Newmark aim their sights directly at eBay for their benefit.

Answer 1

当我写于2008年时，注意到Delaware没有股东压迫保护；本案是由小型私有企业的大股东发起，根据严格审查标准，对平等权保护诉讼的复议。外界中的有利评论，分析了本案中压迫保护的诉由（相关主题的具体评论内容，见歌顿 史密斯教授的分析文章）这样说也许不为过，通常一场收购或解体就是股东压迫赔偿 - 股东免责之道

这么看，eEay如果卖不掉，就陷入窘境。Delaware法院仍有权制约公司，布克马司特和牛马克可能因此再度尝试提起惩罚性诉讼,根据公司法自利交易原则起诉eBay。该审查标准只有在布克马司特和牛马克出于自身利益，直接锁定eBay时，才能生效。

Answer 2

当我写的关于该协议在2008年,我发现特拉华没有补救的压迫,这是一个高度为不公正的行为标准的评论被多数股东在小、私营企业。有一些不错的评论,分析该案件有压迫带来了新的问题和顾虑。(详细的评论,沿着这些线分析由教授戈登·史密斯)。这也许是正确的,但在典型的压迫收购或者解散——一个逃跑的股东。

在这里,eEay贴在它的位置,如果不卖。特拉华法庭仍将规范公司在某种程度上,先生Buckmaster they Newmark可能会再试试,采取惩罚性的行动对付易趣公司法律规则,规范下通向。这些标准只会引发Buckmaster和公Newmark如果they直接瞄准目标在易趣为了他们的利益。