>>725630357
You can get sued over it since it's at the very minimum a registered trademark.
That said you only really violate it if it's in context of violence. Non violent video games that still have a health mechanic (i.e. environmental damage) could still use it.
The problem is more that via Geneva Conventions the Red Cross HAS to be politically neutral and try to equally save lives in both sides of the conflict... so med kits applying only to the player but not the opponent, and the med kit enabling the player to kill more opponents (instead of still being a casualty who goes home or making enemies surrender or heal wounded enemy soldiers), that's the violation of it. In this case the "red cross med kit" exists in the context of "it enables you to kill more people". At which point the neutrality goes out of the window.
So you are basically violating the neutrality clause. And even in media that is a violation because everyone across the world needs to truly understand and believe that the Red Cross is neutral and not a partizan party... and media displaying them as a non-neutral party could potentially damage that image. So in a way, even if unintentional it could be seen as a form of libel/slander.
