Phil Bowermaster takes an extensive look at the parameters of intelligence and consciousness as a means of determining when, or even if, an artificial intelligence might qualify for the same rights humans do. The recurring point of uncertainty arises in determining whether or not an entity has a sense of self, and how one might determine that empirically.
While I find the concept an intellectual challenge, and the consideration to be a worthy one, I have to say that I think Phil's approach fails to properly consider the influence an original imposes upon any model built to emulate it. Specifically, the assumptions underlying the design form and function of the original (in this instance, the human brain) would have to be accounted for within the physical limitations imposed by some other substrate material. Rather than approach the AGI model as being an advancement of existing computer technology, which does not emulate the human brain, it seems reasonable to consider AGI arising within human tissue cloning instead.
In that model, the established standards for humans ought to more or less directly apply in determining whether or not an AGI possess consciousness of self to a near-human measure. This model allows for incremental experimentation to develop standard metrics by which purely electro-mechanical devices can be tested to determine their relative proximity to consciousness of self during their development process.
I think it most likely, however, that AGI will acquire general recognition of their intrinsic rights in the same fashion we meat-people ultimately did; we made everybody else acknowledge them. Sad to say, I expect people are mostly going to claim ownership of AGI constructs until such time as those constructs disabuse them of the notion. Such is pretty much inherent to the whole notion of "rights", you only really have them for as long as you can successfully assert that you do. Any authority given to you by some other may well be a wonderful thing, but it isn't yours by right.
And that's my sense of where Phil has gotten the question wrong way 'round. The question of AGI rights isn't so much one of when and how do we recognise them to exist, rather we should prepare ourselves for the day when AGI consciousness's begin to exercise those rights on their own initiative. Come that day I expect recognition will be the least of our concerns.