Yes, very much along the same lines. Though proving that a photo was taken with a certain camera is not really enough. You need to prove that it came from a particular photographer/journalists camera who licensed their images to an outlet who is willing to certify that they trust the photographer not to have tampered with the image (or along this type of line).

Certainly you could also just trust the photographer, but a chain of trust might be preferable to the general viewer (eg. I don't necessarily trust Photographer X, but I trust The Guardian and if The Guardian trusts this photo taken by Photographer X to be authentic, then I trust this image to be authentic).

Edit: I read more about the CAI and C2PA[1] and I think it would be sufficient for provenance and origin purposes, so what is missing is the trust network. It's likely going to a while for media outlets to establish trust networks and phase out the old, untrusted ways. There's definitely going to be room for both and I imagine outlets will start using terms like "we have received images from multiple sources, however their authenticity has not be verified by our editors".

[1] https://c2pa.org/specifications/specifications/1.3/specs/C2P...