Why would we make artificial humans, when it's easy enough to make "real" ones?
Anyway, I'm still trying to grapple with just what it means for something to have a "right" in the first place. It's a word that is thrown around, and we have emotions with it, but it's hard to understand what it actually means in practice.
I think the practical definition is "If you are considered to have a right to 'something', and someone tries to prevent you from having* that 'something', then that person can be punished and/or the rights-holder may be given some restitution."
So when it comes to AI, what is the point of rights? What is something to which you would need to guarantee an AI has access? Does an AI even have "wants".
*There has to be a stipulation that the only thing preventing access is refusal, not lack of availability. For instance, if you have a "right to green t-shirts" but all green t-shirts are currently being worn by other people, there is no rights violation if you don't get one. It's only a rights violation if there is a green t-shirt just sitting there, you have enough money to buy it, and someone says "no sorry." There's a muddy area though, for instance if you have the capacity to make T-shirts, people want t-shirts, but you just simply stop making T-shirts. This is muddy, because if someone doesn't want to make T-shirts any more, can you force them? Maybe you avoid rights violations by forcing a sale of the T-shirt-making capacity? That is, you are allowed to quit the game, but you can't take the ball with you.